Vindesh Jaysawal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 January, 2026

Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke

Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742




                                             1                         MCRC-55289-2021
             IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                   AT GWALIOR
                                       BEFORE
                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                         MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 55289 of 2021
                           VINDESH JAYSAWAL AND OTHERS
                                        Versus
                     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
         Appearance:
                  Shri Kuber Boddh - Advocate alongwith Shri Vijay Sundram -
         Advocat for the petitioners.
                  Shri Brijesh Kumar Tyagi - Public Prosecutor for the State.
                  None for the respondent No.2 though served.

         RESERVED ON              :-      14/01/2026
         DELIVERED ON             :-      16/01/2026
                                                 ORDER

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashment of First Information Report (FIR) registered at Crime No.546 of 2019 by Police Station Janakganj, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 323, 506, 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(d), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015) and all consequential proceedings.

As per prosecution story, the complainant/prosecutrix, daughter of Satish Maurya, aged about 20 years, resident of Sunar Ki Bagiya, Ramdas Ghati, appeared before Police Station Janakganj, Gwalior, along with her mother Phoolwati, and submitted a written complaint alleging that about NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

2 MCRC-55289-2021 three months prior to the lodging of the report, the complainant had gone to get wheat grind into flour at the flour mill of the accused Vindesh Jaiswal (petitioner No.1). The accused allegedly asked her to bring money from his house, stating that he had to pay the cart owner. Acting on this request, the complainant went to the house of the accused, who followed her there. It was further alleged that upon reaching the house, the wife of the accused offered the complainant water to drink. Thereafter, the accused allegedly bolted the door of the house from inside and sent his wife outside. The accused is alleged to have thereafter committed forcible sexual intercourse with the complainant. It was further alleged that when the complainant regained consciousness, she found herself without clothes and started crying. Upon asking for her clothes, the petitoner No.2/wife of the accused allegedly

handed them over, after which the complainant returned to her house. It was further alleged that the complainant did not disclose the incident to anyone due to threats extended by the accused that if she disclosed the incident, he would kill her and her brother. It was further alleged that on 24.07.2019, the accused again assaulted the complainant at his shop. Thereafter, the complainant allegedly disclosed the entire incident to her mother and brother and, on the next day, approached the police station along with her mother to lodge the report. On the basis of the said complaint, alleged F.I.R. was registered against the petitioners, and the matter was taken up for investigation.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned First Information Report and the consequential criminal proceedings are liable to NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

3 MCRC-55289-2021 be quashed in exercise of the inherent powers of this Hon'ble Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as continuation of the same would amount to a clear abuse of the process of law and would not serve the ends of justice.

It was further submitted that as per the prosecution story itself, the alleged incident of sexual assault is stated to have occurred about three months prior to the lodging of the FIR and there is an inordinate and unexplained delay in reporting the incident. No plausible or convincing explanation has been furnished for such prolonged silence. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Wajid and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2023) 20 SCC 219, has held that unexplained and abnormal delay in lodging the FIR, particularly in serious offences, is a significant circumstance which casts a serious doubt on the credibility of the prosecution version and entitles the Court to exercise its jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process.

It was further submitted that the conduct of the prosecutrix, as narrated in the FIR, is wholly unnatural and improbable. Despite alleging commission of such a grave offence, she neither raised any alarm nor made any immediate complaint to her family members or to any authority, and claims to have remained silent for months thereafter. Such conduct renders the prosecution version inherently improbable. In Haji Iqbal @ Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2023) 20 SCC 209, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically held that where the conduct of the complainant is inconsistent with normal human behaviour and the allegations

appear inherently improbable, the High Court would be justified in NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

4 MCRC-55289-2021 exercising powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings.

It is submitted that petitioner No. 2, Madhu Jaiswal, has been falsely implicated without any specific role being attributed to her. The allegations against her are vague, omnibus, and founded merely on her marital relationship with petitioner No. 1. The FIR and accompanying materials do not disclose the essential ingredients of any offence against her. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has repeatedly cautioned against mechanical implication of relatives in criminal cases, and such vague allegations cannot form the basis of a criminal trial.

It is further apparent from the FIR that the complaint was lodged only after an alleged altercation dated 24.07.2019 at the shop of petitioner No. 1. This subsequent incident has been used as a pretext to introduce allegations of rape relating to an incident allegedly occurring three months earlier. This clearly indicates that the allegations are an afterthought arising out of a personal and monetary dispute and have been maliciously given a criminal colour, which falls squarely within the parameters laid down in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, warranting quashment.

It is also submitted that the invocation of provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is wholly mechanical and without factual foundation. There is no allegation of intentional insult, intimidation, or humiliation on the basis of caste in public view, which is a sine qua non for attracting the provisions of the said Act. Thus, the application of the Act is legally unsustainable. NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

5 MCRC-55289-2021 It was further submitted that even if the allegations in the FIR are taken at their face value and accepted in entirety, they do not disclose the commission of the alleged offences in a manner sufficient to justify continuation of criminal proceedings. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Wajid ( supra) has reiterated that where allegations are manifestly attended with mala fides and are instituted with an ulterior motive, continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law.

It was further submitted that after the registration of the FIR, the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 CrPC was recorded on 29.07.2019. A perusal of the said statement reveals that the prosecutrix had exaggerated and embellished her narrative, even implicating the in-laws of the petitioner without any justifiable basis. It further appears that, on account of prior enmity, she lodged a false report of rape and attempted to falsely implicate the daughter of the petitioners, notwithstanding the fact that the petitioners' daughter could not have had any connection whatsoever with the alleged incident.

It was further submitted that the true facts reveal that the petitioners have been running a long-standing flour and spice grinding shop in the name of "Jaiswal Atta Chakki" at Jhadu Wala Mohalla, Lashkar, Gwalior, which is their sole source of livelihood. Due to a business relationship, the prosecutrix and her mother had borrowed approximately Rs. 40,000-45,000 from the petitioner between March 2015 and June 2017 and avoided repayment. When repayment was demanded, the present false case was instituted as a counterblast.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

6 MCRC-55289-2021 It was further submitted that even after grant of bail, the prosecutrix continued to harass and blackmail the petitioner, pressurizing him to divorce his wife and threatening dire consequences. The falsity of the FIR is further established by the fact that on 08.10.2019, the prosecutrix visited the petitioner in jail and demanded Rs. 10 lakhs, threatening to kill his wife and children in case of non-payment. Such conduct squarely attracts the ratio laid down in Haji Iqbal @ Bala (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held that proceedings initiated for extortion and coercion cannot be permitted to continue.

It was further submitted that the prosecutrix has indulged in continued harassment by creating objectionable content on social media and by abusing the petitioners' family members, which further demonstrates that the criminal proceedings are motivated by malice and ulterior considerations rather than any genuine grievance.

It was further submitted that the learned trial court, while framing charges, failed to consider that the FIR, charge-sheet, and annexed documents do not disclose the commission of the alleged offences and that the petitioners were entitled to discharge at the threshold. The impugned order suffers from non-application of mind.

In view of the aforesaid facts, the settled principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court including in Mohd. Wajid and Others vs.

State of U.P., ( supra) and Haji Iqbal @ Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of U.P., ( supra), it is submitted that continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners would amount to a clear abuse of the process of law, NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

7 MCRC-55289-2021 and therefore, the FIR and all consequential proceedings deserve to be quashed.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the petition and submittted that the First Information Report as well as the material collected during investigation clearly disclose commission of cognizable offences against the petitioners. It is contended that at the stage of exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, this Court is not required to conduct a meticulous examination of evidence or adjudicate upon the truthfulness of the allegations. The FIR, the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 CrPC, and the charge-sheet collectively make out a prima facie case, and therefore, the criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the threshold. It is further submitted that the grounds raised by the petitioners pertain to disputed questions of fact, which can only be adjudicated during trial after appreciation of evidence. The delay in lodging the FIR, the conduct of the prosecutrix, and the defence set up by the petitioners are matters of evidence and cannot be a basis for quashing the proceedings at this stage. The learned trial court has rightly framed charges after due application of mind, and no illegality or perversity is made out warranting interference by this Court. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

None for the respondent No.2 even after service of notice upon her. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is well settled that the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are to be exercised to prevent abuse NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

8 MCRC-55289-2021 of the process of law and to secure the ends of justice. Although such powers are to be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, it is equally trite that where the allegations are manifestly attended with mala fides, are inherently improbable, or where the continuation of criminal proceedings would result in a miscarriage of justice, this Court would be failing in its duty if it does not intervene. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, has held that where allegations are instituted with oblique motives or without disclosure of essential ingredients of an offence, continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law.

In the present case, from the allegations made in the FIR and are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, the prosecution story suffers from serious infirmities. The alleged incident of sexual assault is stated to have occurred nearly three months prior to the lodging of the FIR, and the delay in reporting remains inordinate and unexplained by any cogent or convincing material. Such prolonged silence, particularly in a case alleging a grave offence, casts serious doubt on the credibility of the prosecution version. Moreover, the conduct of the complainant, as narrated in both the FIR and her statement under Section 164 CrPC, appears inconsistent with normal human behaviour. The sequence of events described in the 164 statement -- including her movements to multiple locations such as the fort, temple, train, and the accused's in-laws' house -- is highly improbable and materially inconsistent with the FIR. Certain acts attributed to the accused's wife and daughter are mentioned in the 164 statement but are absent from the NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

9 MCRC-55289-2021 FIR, and vice versa. These contradictions, taken together, seriously undermine the reliability of the prosecution narrative.

Further, the allegations of sexual assault and physical abuse are not supported by any medical evidence. No medical examination or forensic report has been placed on record that could substantiate the alleged acts. In cases involving grave offences such as sexual assault, medical and forensic evidence is a critical element of proof, particularly where there is an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. The absence of such evidence further weakens the prosecution's case and raises serious questions regarding the veracity of the allegations.

Considering the inordinate delay, the inherent contradictions between the FIR and the 164 CrPC statement, and the absence of corroborative medical evidence, the prosecution story appears inherently improbable. The criminal proceedings, when viewed in totality, appear to have been instituted for oblique and ulterior motives rather than in the interest of justice. Continuation of such proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law and cause serious prejudice to the petitioners. This approach finds support in the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Wajid and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2023) 20 SCC 219, and Haji Iqbal @ Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2023) 20 SCC 209, wherein it was held that where allegations are inherently improbable, manifestly attended with mala fides, or appear to be instituted with oblique motives, the High Court is justified in exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

10 MCRC-55289-2021 So far as petitioner No. 2 is concerned, no specific or overt act has been attributed to her, and the allegations against her are vague and omnibus, founded merely on her relationship with petitioner No. 1. Mechanical implication of family members, without disclosure of essential ingredients of any offence, cannot be sustained in law.

Similarly, the invocation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act appears mechanical and without factual foundation, as there is no specific allegation of intentional insult, intimidation, or humiliation on the basis of caste in public view, which is a sine qua non for attracting the provisions of the said Act. In the absence of foundational facts, continuation of proceedings under the SC/ST Act would also constitute an abuse of the process of law.

In view of the foregoing, this Court finds that the contradictions between the FIR and the 164 statement, coupled with the absence of medical evidence, render the continuation of criminal proceedings wholly unsustainable. The allegations, even if accepted at face value, do not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences in a manner warranting trial. Therefore, in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice, and in light of the ratios laid down in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal (supra), Mohd. Wajid and Others vs. State of U.P. (supra), and Haji Iqbal @ Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of U.P. (supra), the petition is allowed. The First Information Report registered at Crime No. 546 of 2019 by Police Station Janakganj, District Gwalior (M.P.) under Sections 376, 323, 506, 34 of IPC and Sections NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1742

11 MCRC-55289-2021 3(1)(d), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015), and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT

2.5.4.20=b864d1ab4ace2215bfcf3ab301c34d631287f1b1cdd

pwn* 90b4a49f265f02d9d593f, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR,CID - 7064434, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, serialNumber=61b9d129971d2ea4fd4455ed49ea436ea65e2 6164beeed89153191c56e98ce21, cn=PAWAN KUMAR Date: 2026.01.16 16:52:47 +05'30'