ORDER

1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeking quashment of the impugned order and subsequent proceedings.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by the Special Judge (OAW), Indore, District Indore in Sessions Trial No. 96/2022. By the impugned order, the learned trial court allowed an application filed by the Public Prosecutor under Section 207 BNSS / 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. and permitted additional documents to be taken on record. The petitioner also challenges the supplementary charge-sheet filed on 27.01.2025 pursuant to the said order, on the ground that the procedure adopted is contrary to the law and amounts to an incorrect interpretation of the earlier order passed by this Court on 21.09.2024 in M.Cr.C. No.46527/2023.

3. On August 14, 2026, this Court directed the counsel for the State to file a clear affidavit detailing all instances dating back to 2004. Specifically, the State was ordered to specify which applications were filed by the prosecutrix and received by the police authorities, as well as the actions taken by the police from 2004 until the lodging of the FIR in 2021. Furthermore, the State was directed to provide a clear explanation justifying why certain documents were omitted from the initial charge sheet but subsequently filed in the supplementary charge sheet.

4. In compliance with the order dated August 14, 2026, the counsel for the State filed written submissions on October 5, 2026. The State submitted that the records pertaining to the complaints and applications allegedly made by the complainant between 2004 and 2019 are no longer available. Due to the lapse of time and in accordance with the applicable Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), old records are periodically weeded out and destroyed. The State emphasized that the empowered committee only permits the destruction of records if the relevant complaint or FIR investigation has been officially closed, meaning the earlier complaints were closed at the relevant time. The authorities at Neemuch followed due process, placed the relevant material before the duly constituted committee, and obtained permission to destroy the old records, after which the requisite certificate was issued. Consequently, the original applications allegedly submitted by the complainant during that period are no longer available in the records of the Neemuch police authorities. The State further noted that the existing certificate was prepared solely on the basis of information provided by the complainant to the Indore police, and no record of the complaints remains with the police at Neemuch.

Prosecution Story:

5. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the prosecutrix lodged an FIR on 17.03.2021 alleging that in the year 2004, the petitioner, posing as one Sanjay Kothari, offered her a job in Indore. On 13.12.2004, he allegedly took her to an office, locked the door, and committed rape, threatening her with dire consequences. It is alleged that out of fear and concern for her social reputation, she did not lodge a complaint immediately, but later filed a written complaint in 2007 against "Sanjay Kothari," which yielded no results. Subsequently, on 02.04.2019, she allegedly found the Facebook ID of the petitioner (Sunil Kothari) who resembled the accused, leading to various complaints from 2019 to 2020, and ultimately the registration of FIR No. 71/2021 for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC. After investigation, the primary charge-sheet was filed on 25.10.2021.

Submissions on behalf of the Petitioner:

6. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order and the subsequent supplementary charge-sheet are a gross abuse of the process of law. It is submitted that earlier, on 03.07.2023, the prosecutrix herself had moved an application under Section 24