HC quashes case against woman accused of disrupting Rampur SDM court proceedings
Court says continuation of prosecution would amount to abuse of process; finds evidentiary material insufficient to connect petitioner with alleged offences
HC quashes case against woman accused of disrupting Rampur SDM court proceedings
Shimla, Sept 5,
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a woman accused of disrupting proceedings in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Rampur Bushahr, holding that continuation of the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law.
Justice Sandeep Sharma, while allowing a petition filed by Pallavi Ramchaik, quashed the Kalandra registered against her under Sections 221 and 267 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) at Police Station Rampur, along with all consequential proceedings. The court also discharged the petitioner from the case.
The case arose from an incident on February 24, 2025, during the hearing of Bhupesh Kumar versus State of Himachal Pradesh before the SDM, Rampur Bushahr.
According to the complaint referred to in the judgment, Ramchaik, who is the wife of Bhupesh Kumar, allegedly entered the courtroom without permission while arguments were underway and began raising objections and advancing arguments.
The SDM alleged that despite being directed to leave the courtroom, she continued with her conduct, thereby obstructing him in the discharge of his official duties and hampering the court proceedings. The conduct was alleged to have amounted to interference with the administration of justice.
Also read: Himachal HC quashes HIMUDA CEO appointment, says incumbent was ineligible
Acting on the SDM’s complaint to the SHO, Rampur, police prepared a Kalandra under Sections 221 and 267 of the BNS through a General Diary entry dated February 25, 2025. After obtaining permission from the Magistrate concerned, the Kalandra was presented before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur Bushahr, where proceedings were pending.
Ramchaik subsequently approached the High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking quashing of the Kalandra and the proceedings arising from it.
Her counsel, Vinod Sharma, assisted by Rakesh Kumar, argued that in view of Section 215 of the BNSS, proceedings for the offences in question could not have been instituted in the manner adopted in the case. The petitioner contended that the statutory requirement regarding a written complaint by the competent public servant or authority had not been complied with.
The State, represented by Additional Advocate General Rajan Kahol, opposed the petition and supported the action taken against the petitioner.
While examining the matter, Justice Sharma discussed the scope of the High Court’s inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, corresponding to the earlier Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash criminal proceedings in order to prevent abuse of the process of court and secure the ends of justice.
The court observed that there was sufficient ground to invoke its inherent jurisdiction in the case. Significantly, it also held that the material collected against the petitioner was not sufficient to connect her with the commission of the offences incorporated in the Kalandra.
The court said that allowing the trial to continue would result in unnecessary harassment and a “protracted ordeal of trial”, besides amounting to a waste of the trial court’s time. It further observed that continuation of proceedings on the basis of the material collected by the investigating agency would cause prejudice to the petitioner and amount to an abuse of the process of law.
“If the evidentiary material collected on record to prove the guilt of the petitioner is perused in its entirety, this is not sufficient to connect the petitioner with the offence alleged to have been committed,” the court observed.
Allowing the petition, the High Court ordered that the Kalandra registered under Sections 221 and 267 BNS at Police Station Rampur Bushahr and all consequential proceedings be quashed and set aside against Ramchaik, and directed that she be discharged from the case.
The judgment was delivered on August 11, 2026.
About the Author
The HimachalScape Bureau comprises seasoned journalists from Himachal Pradesh with over 25 years of experience in leading media conglomerates such as The Times of India and United News of India. Known for their in-depth regional insights, the team brings credible, research-driven, and balanced reportage on Himachal’s socio-political and developmental landscape.
