Gujarat HC Quashes FIR Against Industry Body Chief, Says Negligence Alone Cannot Amount To Abetment

The Gujarat High Court has quashed an FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings against the head of an industrial association, observing that mere negligence or carelessness cannot be treated as abetment without the required criminal intent.

The case arose from a dispute over a contract for an industrial exposition, with an event organiser claiming that ₹22 lakh remained unpaid. The organiser had lodged a complaint at Ellisbridge police station, alleging harassment, threats and misconduct by a senior official of the organisation.

Chief Accused Of Ignoring Harassment Allegations

According to the complaint, the senior official allegedly verbally abused and threatened the event manager and repeatedly told her that her dues would not be paid. She also alleged that he had previously molested and subjected her to physical and mental harassment.

The woman further alleged that when she brought the conduct to the organisation chief's attention, he dismissed the matter, laughed and advised her that she would have to comply with such demands if she wanted to advance her business.

The prosecution argued that the organisation chief could be held liable for abetment because he failed to investigate the allegations and was present at the same hotel during one of the alleged incidents.

Court Finds No Direct Act By Organisation Chief

The single-judge bench, however, noted that CCTV footage and the investigation material did not attribute any direct overt act relating to molestation or stalking to the organisation chief.

The court stressed that mens rea, or criminal intent, is an essential element of abetment.

The bench held that even if the chief's response amounted to negligence or carelessness, dismissive remarks or failure to initiate internal action after an alleged incident could not, by themselves, amount to an illegal omission or criminal conspiracy.

Proceedings Against Other Accused Can Continue

On these grounds, the High Court quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings against the industry body chief.

The court made it clear, however, that its order did not affect the proceedings against the other individuals accused in the case, which can continue independently.