Chhattisgarh High Court Refuses Relief To Professor Accused Of Forcing Hindu Students To Offer Namaz At NSS Camp

The Chhattisgarh High Court last week refused to quash a criminal case against a professor working at Guru Ghasidas Central University, Bilaspur, for allegedly forcing Hindu students to offer Namaz during an NSS camp in March last year.

A bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal noted that the charge-sheet reveals prima facie evidence against him, which warrants trial. It added that there is no conclusive proof at this stage that the proceedings were instituted with ulterior motives.

Briefly put, as per the prosecution's case, on March 30, 2025, on the occasion of Eid-ul-Fitr, 4 Muslim students were called upon to offer Namaz and the other students were allegedly directed to join them without their consent and were compelled to participate.

Allegedly, when certain students raised their objections, they were threatened with cancellation of their certificates and were subjected to intimidation. Based on their complaint, the police implicated the accused-applicant (Professor Dilip Jha), the Project Coordinator of the said camp, along with other faculty members and individuals.

An FIR was lodged under Sections 196(1)(b), 197(1) (b) (c), 299, 302,190 BNSS and in May 2025, a chargesheet was filed, upon which cognizance was taken by the trial court in October 2025.

Challenging the entire criminal proceedings, Jha moved the HC.

Before the HC, his counsel (Advocate Arjit Tiwari) argued that the FIR is vexatious as Jha was functioning solely as a Project Coordinator for the NSS programme and he had no operational or supervisory role at the camp site at the time of the alleged incident.

It was contended that the statements of the complainant and other witnesses confirm that the petitioner was not present during the occurrence and the materials collected during investigation show no evidence connecting him to the alleged acts.

Thus, it was submitted that the continuation of proceedings would cause irreparable harm to the petitioner's professional career, reputation and personal liberty

On the other hand, the State counsel submitted that the present quashing petition was not maintainable at this stage, as the charge-sheet had already been filed after a detailed investigation.

It was also submitted that the filing of the charge-sheet indicates that the investigating agency has found sufficient material to proceed against the petitioner, and it is now for the competent court to examine the evidence and determine the petitioner's liability.

Lastly, it was contended that interference at this stage would amount to pre-judging the merits of the case, which is impermissible, and could impede the criminal process.

Against this backdrop, the bench noted that the charge-sheet indicates that the investigation revealed prima facie evidence warranting trial, and there is no conclusive proof at this stage that the proceedings were instituted with ulterior motives.

The division bench also referred to the Supreme Court's verdict in Mohammad Wajid vs State of UP 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 624, wherein it was held that once a charge-sheet is filed, the accused can approach the trial court to challenge the evidence or seek anticipatory relief, rather than invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court to pre-empt the trial process.

"It is evident that the petitioner has already granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner's contention regarding absence from the scene or administrative role is a matter that can be fully addressed during the trial through cross-examination and presentation of evidence. Interference at this stage would amount to pre-judging issues of fact and evidence, which the Court is not empowered to do," the bench said as it dismissed the plea.

Case title - Dilip Jha vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others

Case Citation :

Click Here To Read/Download Order