The Chhattisgarh High Court has declined to quash an FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings against professor Dilip Jha, who is accused of coercing non-Muslim students to participate in offering namaz during a National Service Scheme (NSS) camp in Bilaspur.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, in its April 15 order, refused to interfere with the FIR, the charge sheet, and the trial court’s cognizance order.
The Court observed that the investigation had been completed and sufficient material was available to proceed against the accused. It noted that the charge sheet disclosed prima facie evidence warranting a trial and found no conclusive indication that the case was initiated with ulterior motives.
Rejecting Jha’s argument that he had no operational role at the camp and was not present during the alleged incident, the Court held that such claims require examination during trial.
The case stems from a seven-day NSS camp organised by Guru Ghasidas Central University in March. During the camp, Muslim students reportedly offered namaz on stage on the occasion of Eid-ul-Fitr, and according to the complaint, other students were allegedly compelled to participate without consent.
The complaint further alleged that students who objected faced threats of adverse consequences, including cancellation of certificates. Following a preliminary inquiry, the police registered an FIR and later filed a charge sheet naming Jha, who served as project coordinator, among the accused.
Jha contended that his implication was baseless and amounted to abuse of the legal process. However, the State, represented by government advocate Priyank Rathi, argued that the case involved disputed questions of fact that must be examined during trial.
Agreeing with the State’s submissions, the High Court held that such factual disputes cannot be adjudicated in proceedings seeking quashing of an FIR. It emphasized that issues such as Jha’s presence at the site or his administrative role can only be properly assessed through evidence and cross-examination during trial.
The Court relied on established legal principles laid down in cases such as State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal and Mohammed Wajid v. State of UP, reiterating that criminal proceedings may be quashed only in exceptional circumstances.
Finding no such exceptional grounds, the High Court dismissed the petition.
Advocate Arjit Tiwari appeared for the accused.