FIR Quashed Due to Factual Impossibility and 12-Year Delay: Karnataka High Court Cites 'Inherently Improbable' Allegations under S.482 BNSS - 2025-09-23

Karnataka High Court Quashes FIR Against Film Director, Citing 'Factually Impossible' Allegations and 12-Year Delay

Bengaluru: In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court has quashed an FIR registered against film director Ranjith Balakrishnan for alleged sexual assault, deeming the accusations "factually impossible" and "inherently improbable." Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar highlighted an inordinate and unexplained delay of nearly 12 years in filing the complaint as a key factor demonstrating a malicious intent and abuse of the legal process.

Case Background

The case originated from a complaint filed on August 30, 2024, by Sajeer Cholayil. He alleged that in December 2012, Mr. Balakrishnan, a prominent film director, sexually assaulted him at the Taj Hotel near the Kempegowda International Airport (BIAL) in Bengaluru. Based on this complaint, an FIR was registered by the BIAL Police Station under Section 377 of the IPC (unnatural offences) and Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Mr. Balakrishnan subsequently filed a writ petition before the High Court, seeking to quash the FIR and all related proceedings, arguing that the complaint was fabricated and malicious.

Arguments of the Parties

The petitioner, represented by Senior Counsel Prabhuling Navadgi, presented a crucial piece of evidence: the Taj Hotel at BIAL, the alleged venue of the incident, was inaugurated only in late 2015 and became operational in 2016. This made it physically impossible for the alleged crime to have occurred there in December 2012. The defence contended that this "irrefutable fact" fundamentally undermined the complainant's entire narrative.

Furthermore, the petitioner's counsel stressed the extraordinary delay of almost 12 years in lodging the complaint, arguing it pointed towards a malicious motive and was a clear abuse of the court's process.

The State, representing the police, argued against the petition, submitting that there was no merit in it. The complainant, despite being served notice, remained unrepresented and did not contest the petition.

Court's Reasoning and Legal Principles

Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar, in his order, found compelling merit in the petitioner's arguments. The court held that the non-existence of the hotel at the specified time rendered the complaint's core allegation impossible.

Factual Impossibility and Inherent Improbability

The judgment heavily relied on the landmark Supreme Court case, State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal (1992) , which empowers High Courts to quash proceedings if "the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused."

The court stated:

"This irrefutable fact renders the entire narrative of 2nd respondent as fabricated and impossible, especially when this glaring factual inconsistency fundamentally undermines the credibility of the allegations and demonstrates malafide intent behind the complaint."

The court also cited Rajiv Thapar vs. Madan Lal Kapoor (2013) , which permits the High Court to consider "sound, reasonable, and indubitable facts" and material of "sterling and impeccable quality" produced by the accused to quash proceedings at a preliminary stage.

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay

The second pillar of the court's reasoning was the "long inordinate and unexplained delay" in filing the complaint. The alleged incident took place in December 2012, but the complaint was filed only in August 2024.

Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Chanchalapathi Das vs. State of West Bengal (2023) , where an eight-year delay was held to be a "sheer misuse and abuse of the process of the court," the High Court observed:

"In the instant case, the complaint was filed merely 12 years after the alleged incident without any plausible explanation for this extraordinary delay and this temporal gap not only weakens the credibility of the allegations but also raises serious questions about the motives of 2nd respondent..."

Final Verdict and Implications

Concluding that the continuation of criminal proceedings against Mr. Balakrishnan would amount to a clear abuse of the process of law, the High Court allowed the petition. The court quashed the FIR in Crime No.64/2024 registered by the BIAL Police as well as the original complaint filed before the Kasaba Police Station in Kozhikode, Kerala.

This judgment reinforces the principle that the High Court's inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now Section 528 of BNSS, 2023) can be invoked to prevent malicious prosecution, especially when allegations are demonstrably false or accompanied by an unexplained and inordinate delay that casts serious doubt on their veracity.