SAJAL BOSE versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Citation: [2026] 4 S.C.R. 398 · Decided: 06-04-2026 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAM NATH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2026] 4 S.C.R. 398 : 2026 INSC 322
Sajal Bose 
v. 
The State of West Bengal and Ors.
(Criminal Appeal No. 1774 of 2026)
06 April 2026
[Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta* and N.V. Anjaria, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in quashing the 
proceedings against the two co-accused and declining the similar 
relief to the remaining accused. 
Headnotes†
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Bharatiya Nagarik 
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – s.528 – Quashing of FIR – Complaint 
regarding assault and criminal intimidation – FIR lodged  
u/ss.143, 341, 323, 324, 504, 506, 509, and 427 IPC – Quashing 
of proceedings sought – High Court quashed proceedings 
against two co-accused but denied similar relief to the 
appellants – Correctness:
Held: Upon cumulative consideration of the allegations in the FIR, 
the material collected during investigation, and the evidence placed 
on record, the present case falls where allegations made in the FIR, 
even if taken at their face value, do not prima facie constitute any 
offence; the uncontroverted allegations and the material collected 
fail to disclose the commission of an offence; and the criminal 
proceeding manifestly attended with malafide and instituted with 
an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance – Even if the allegations 
in the FIR and the material collected during investigation are taken 
at their face value and accepted in their entirety, they do not prima 
facie constitute the necessary ingredients of offences alleged 
against the appellants – Further, the uncontroverted material 
available on record-CCTV footage, completely belies the allegation 
of their participation in the alleged offences so as to justify their 
being put to trial – Attendant circumstances-admitted pre-existing 
disputes between the parties and the absence of specific and 
distinct overt acts attributed to the appellants, lend substance to 
* Author
[2026] 4 S.C.R. 
399
Sajal Bose v. The State of West Bengal and Ors.
their submission that the criminal proceedings manifestly attended 
with malafide and have been initiated with an ulterior motive – 
Permitting the continuation of prosecution of the appellants would 
amount to an abuse of the process of law – Compelling appellant 
Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to face a full-fledged criminal trial would serve no 
meaningful purpose – Continuation of such proceedings, in face 
of total lack of credible material connecting them with the alleged 
offences, would amount to misuse of the criminal process – Where 
reliable and unimpeachable material demonstrably displaces the 
factual basis of the accusations and the prosecution is unable to 
effectively counter the same, the Court would be justified in invoking 
its inherent jurisdiction to prevent injustice – Such an approach not 
only accords justice to the accused but also obviates the wastage 
of precious judicial time on proceedings which, on the admitted 
material, do not hold a reasonable prospect of culminating in 
conviction – Impugned judgment and order cannot be sustained 
in law and is set aside. [Paras 31, 34, 35]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.428 – Bharatiya Nagarik 
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – s.528 – Inherent Jurisdiction of the 
High Court – Scope and ambit of – Discussed. [Paras 22, 23]
Case Law Cited
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [1990] Supp. 3 SCR 259 : (1992) 
Supp. 1 SCC 335; Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani v. State of Uttar 
Pradesh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1947 – relied on.
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Bharatiya 
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; Constitution of India.
List of Keywords
Quashing of proceedings; Assault; Criminal intimidation; Inherent 
jurisdiction of the High Court; Absence of specific and distinct 
overt act; Pre-existing dispute; Electronic evidence; CCTV footage; 
Physical assault; Threat. 
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
1774 of 2026
400
[2026] 4 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
From the Judgment and Order dated 08.03.2024 of the High Court 
at Calcutta in CRR No. 1476 of 2023.
With
Criminal Appeal No(s). 1775 and 1776 of 2026.
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant(s):
Gaurav Agarwal, Sr. Adv., Sandeep Kumar Mahapatra,  
Ms. Mrinmayee Sahu, Sugam Kumar Jha, Sreedas Kp, Diwakar 
Maheshwari, Karun Mehta, Shounak Mitra, Ms. Pratiksha Mishra, 
Shreyash Edupuganti, Ms. Kaarunya Lakshmi, M/s Khaitan & Co. 
Advs. for the Respondent(s):
Siddhart Luthra, Sr. Adv., Kunal Chatterj

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.