The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to quash a case against a professor accused of coercing non-Muslim students to offer namaz during a National Service Scheme camp, Bar and Bench reported on Monday.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal noted on April 15 that on a preliminary reading, the chargesheet showed that there was evidence against the accused man, Dilip Jha, Live Law reported.
However, it also noted that there was no conclusive proof at this stage that the proceedings were instituted with ulterior motives.
The alleged incident took place at a seven-day National Service Scheme camp organised by Guru Ghasidas Central University in Bilaspur in March 2025. During the camp, Muslim students were asked to offer namaz on stage on the occasion of the Muslim festival Eid-ul-Fitr.
Other students were also allegedly compelled to participate in the prayers without their consent. As per a police complaint filed by them, it was alleged that those who objected were threatened with adverse consequences, including cancellation of certificates, Live Law reported.
After the complaint was filed, the police conducted a preliminary inquiry and then registered a first information report. Following this, a chargesheet was filed naming Jha, who served as a project coordinator, along with several others.
A trial court had taken cognisance of the chargesheet in October.
In his petition seeking the quashing of the FIR, Jha argued that he had no operational role at the camp. He added that he was implicated on “baseless” grounds, Bar and Bench reported.
Opposing the petition, the state government said that the matter involved disputed questions of fact that must be tested during trial.
On April 15, the High Court rejected Jha’s contention that he had no operational role at the camp and was not present during the alleged incident, Bar and Bench reported. It added that the investigation had already been completed and sufficient material had been collected to proceed against him.
The bench also held that such factual disputes cannot be adjudicated in a petition for quashing the petition.
“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,” the legal news portal quoted the bench as saying.
The High Court added that interference at this stage would amount to “pre-judging issues of fact and evidence” that it is not empowered to do.
Just 0.2% of readers pay for news. The others don’t care if it dies. You can help make a difference. Support independent journalism – join Scroll now.
We’re not driven by clicks or corporate interests – just honest, independent reporting. Keep us going. Support Scroll today!