File a writ petition if you have evidence of collusion with you

file a supplementary affidavit in your pending High Court quashing petition to place the NHRC case status and your Section 223 BNSS (formerly 200 CrPC) complaint on the official judicial record. 

2)file urgent hearing application for your protective writ petition, highlighting the continuous threat of fresh, fabricated cases.

1) Once the police file the charge sheet, move a Discharge Application before the trial court. Argue that the evidence collected by the police, even if taken at face value, does not establish a prima facie case against you under Sections 74 and 79 BNS.

2) : File a Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court of India against the High Court's dismissal order.

Since there are umpteen number of cases filed by you and against you, it is advisable to handle them patiently to clear them one by one.

Yes, you can add all those documents you rely upon as additional typed set of papers to the existing writ petition.

There's no provision to invoke for adding the documents now proposed to add.

If the high court has already stayed the proceedings of the pending FIR, then the court will not proceed further in this regard, you can wait for the finalisation of the quash petition till then.

If quash petition is dismissed by high court then you can file a discharge petition before the trial court and if that is also dismissed then you can challenge the case against you on merits as well as the documents you rely upon.

Dear Client,

If the quashing petition fails, do not file a second quashing petition on the same grounds (it is generally impermissible). Instead, defend the trial aggressively by filing a discharge application under Section 250 BNSS (if chargesheet is filed) to show there is no prima facie case, and simultaneously file a writ petition under Article 226 seeking prohibition (to stop subordinate court proceedings) or mandamus (to direct fair investigation/protection); if new material emerges later, a second quashing may be considered on changed circumstances. If police act in collusion with the complainant, seek transfer of investigation to a different agency (CID) on grounds of bias and file complaints for false charge (Section 248 BNS) and giving false information (Section 217 BNS) after acquittal or quashing.

Yes, you can file a separate Section 175(3) BNSS application before the Magistrate for a new FIR/investigation against newly identified co‑accused even while a Section 223 BNSS matter is pending, provided you show new material. For civil remedies, file a civil suit for damages/compensation for malicious prosecution and defamation against the complainant (and against police officers if misconduct is proven), and seek compensation under Section 273 BNSS after acquittal. If police retaliate, maintain a detailed evidence trail, send written complaints to SP/DGP with copies to NHRC, and immediately file a writ of mandamus + protection application in the High Court seeking court‑directed monitoring and transfer of investigation to an independent agency.

I hope this helps and if you have any further issues do not hesitate to contact us.

Further Legal Remedies

Beyond what you have already initiated, consider filing a formal complaint with the West Bengal State Human Rights Commission (if not already done) for police misconduct and assault. File an application under Section 528 BNSS before the Calcutta High Court seeking quashing of the FIR on grounds of mala fides and abuse of process, supported by your RTI disclosures. You may also initiate contempt proceedings against the erring police officials for disobeying High Court orders or for filing a false FIR despite knowledge of its falsity.

Further Writ Application

File a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Calcutta High Court seeking a direction for a court-monitored investigation by an independent agency (CBI or Special Investigation Team) into the assault on you and the filing of the false FIR. Simultaneously, seek a writ of mandamus commanding the State to pay interim compensation for violation of your fundamental rights under Articles 14 (equality), 19 (personal liberty), and 21 (right to life and dignity).

If Police Retaliate: What to Do

Do not panic. Immediately document everything with video/audio recordings. Rush to the nearest Magistrate and file a complaint under Section 223 BNSS (private complaint) detailing the retaliation. Simultaneously, move your pending quashing petition urgently and bring the retaliation to the High Court's notice via an interlocutory application seeking protection and contempt action. Also file an FIR against the retaliating officers at a different police station or before the Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS.

Application for Inclusion of Evidence to Case Diary — Subsection

Yes, such an application is maintainable under Section 193(3)(ii) and (iii) of the BNSS, which mandates the investigating officer to inform the informant/victim about the investigation's progress and also obligates the police report to contain all evidence, both inculpatory and exculpatory. You can file an application before the Magistrate under Section 193(3) read with Section 210 BNSS, requesting the court to direct the IO to incorporate your listed evidence into the case diary.

Was Submitting Fair Investigation Application to SP and DGP Fruitful? Can Police Retaliate?

Yes, it was strategically fruitful because it creates a formal administrative record and demonstrates your due diligence. The SP/DGP are legally bound to consider it and pass a reasoned order. Failure to act can strengthen your writ petition. RTI on the ATR is excellent to expose inaction. Yes, police can retaliate — but such retaliation is illegal and can be separately complained of. Continue using RTI as a shield; it forces accountability and deters arbitrary action.

During Pending Stay Application, Can Police Lay Chargesheet?

Yes, police can technically file a chargesheet even during a stay of proceedings. However, the Supreme Court has held that filing a chargesheet does not dilute the High Court's inherent power under Section 528 BNSS to quash the FIR. Once chargesheet is filed, you must immediately bring it to the High Court's attention in your pending quashing petition and seek to amend the petition to challenge the chargesheet as well. The stay on proceedings generally stays trial, not investigation/completion of chargesheet.

Monitoring of FIR under Section 175(3) BNSS

Yes, you can seek monitoring of the investigation under Section 175(3) BNSS before the jurisdictional Magistrate. The Supreme Court has clarified that under Section 175(3), a Magistrate can direct the police to investigate a case and can also monitor the progress of investigation, unlike under old CrPC Section 156(3). You must file an application supported by an affidavit before the Magistrate, highlighting the police's collusion and biased investigation, and seek a direction for proper, fair investigation with periodic progress reports.

If Quashing Fails — What Then?

If quashing fails, you proceed to trial on merits but simultaneously file a criminal revision before the Sessions Court or a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court. More importantly, you file a separate civil suit for damages for malicious prosecution against the complainant (the woman) and the police officials. You also continue your parallel remedies: NHRC complaint, State Human Rights Commission, and file a complaint under Section 198 BNS (public servant disobeying law with intent to cause injury) against the police.

Separate Section 175(3) FIR Against Co‑Accused Identified Later — Yes or No?

Yes, a separate application under Section 175(3) BNSS can be filed before the Magistrate to direct registration of FIR against the co‑accused (the woman who assaulted you and the auto driver) even while your Section 223 BNSS private complaint is pending. The two proceedings are separate and can run concurrently. The Magistrate can order police to investigate the role of newly identified accused. BNSS does not bar parallel proceedings for different accused arising from the same transaction.

Proper Legal Steps to Ensure Police and Accused Get Punishment

First, consolidate all evidence — RTI replies, medical reports, photographs, video of assault, your anticipatory bail order. Second, file a private criminal complaint under Section 223 BNSS against the police officials for offences under Section 198 (disobeying law) and Section 201 (framing incorrect document) of BNS. Third, simultaneously file a writ petition for a court-monitored SIT probe. Fourth, approach the Lokayukta or State Vigilance Commission for departmental action. Fifth, pursue criminal contempt before the High Court for violation of court orders.

Civil Remedies  

File a civil suit for damages for malicious prosecution against the woman complainant and the police officers jointly. Claim compensation under three heads: (i) damage to reputation, (ii) injury to person (mental and physical), and (iii) loss of time and expenses. You may also file a separate suit for defamation under the law of torts. Serve a legal notice under Section 80 CPC before filing the civil suit, which is mandatory when suing government/public officers. Additionally, file an application for interim compensation pending the civil suit.

- Under BNS , Section 74 relates to assault or use of criminal force against a woman with intent to outrage her modesty.

- Further, Section 79 relates to words, gestures, acts, or intrusion intended to insult the modesty of a woman.

- Further, only allegations are not a ground for lodging an FIR i.e. offence , and there must be proof of the said act done by you. 

- Since you have already got anticipatory bail then this FIR can be quashed from the High Court , if you have given all the grounds against the FIR. 

- If you have already filed a complaint before the Judicial magistrate , then the magistrate is bound to call status report on your complaint. 

- If police making trouble for you , then you can approach the higher official an even to the NHRC. 

Based on the facts narrated by you, you have already taken several parallel legal steps, including obtaining anticipatory bail from the High Court, filing a quashing petition, moving a stay application, approaching the NHRC, filing a writ petition seeking protection against alleged false cases, submitting complaints to senior police authorities, filing a complaint case under Section 223 BNSS (formerly Section 200 CrPC), and seeking a fair investigation. At this stage, the focus should be on strengthening the evidentiary record and ensuring judicial oversight rather than multiplying proceedings unnecessarily.

If the police have not yet filed a charge-sheet, they may ordinarily continue investigation unless there is a specific stay of investigation or further proceedings granted by the High Court. Mere pendency of a quashing petition or stay application does not automatically prohibit filing of a charge-sheet. Therefore, it is important to ascertain the exact nature of the interim protection, if any, granted by the High Court.

As regards monitoring of investigation, the Magistrate's powers are limited once investigation is underway. However, appropriate applications can be moved before the Magistrate bringing material facts to the court's notice and seeking directions for a fair and proper investigation. The precise maintainability will depend upon the stage of proceedings and the relief sought. Courts are generally more receptive to requests for fair investigation supported by contemporaneous documents, RTI responses, CCTV footage, call records, medical records, or other objective material than to broad allegations of mala fides.

Your applications to the SP and DGP seeking a fair investigation were not futile. In fact, such representations often become valuable documents later because they demonstrate that objections regarding the investigation were raised contemporaneously and before senior supervisory authorities. Similarly, RTI applications seeking the Action Taken Report (ATR) may assist in establishing whether your complaints were acted upon. Merely filing RTIs or complaints to senior authorities does not by itself provide a lawful basis for police retaliation. However, if you genuinely apprehend retaliation, all future communications should preferably be in writing and through traceable channels.

If the quashing petition ultimately fails, that does not mean the case automatically succeeds against you. The standard for quashing is much higher than the standard applicable during trial. Many cases survive a quashing challenge but ultimately fail during discharge proceedings or trial. Therefore, if quashing is refused, the next stage would be to carefully examine the charge-sheet, seek discharge if grounds exist, and thereafter contest the matter on merits.

With respect to your allegation that the FIR was lodged as retaliation for RTI activities, your strongest case will be built not through repeated allegations but through documentary evidence establishing chronology. Courts tend to give considerable weight to timelines showing RTI applications, subsequent disputes, complaints lodged by you, and the sequence in which criminal proceedings were initiated.

As regards civil remedies, if you are able to establish malicious prosecution, abuse of process, false allegations, or wrongful conduct after the criminal proceedings conclude in your favour, civil proceedings for damages may become available. However, such claims are generally stronger after the underlying criminal case has either been quashed or terminated in your favour.

If you believe that the police are acting in collusion with private parties, the most effective immediate remedies usually remain:

• Pursuing the pending quashing proceedings diligently.
• Pressing for disposal of the stay application.
• Pursuing the pending writ petition.
• Following up with NHRC proceedings.
• Preserving all RTI responses, representations, and acknowledgments.
• Collecting independent evidence that contradicts the allegations in the FIR.

At this stage, I would advise concentrating on obtaining orders in the proceedings already instituted rather than initiating numerous fresh proceedings. Courts are generally persuaded by a coherent litigation strategy supported by documentary evidence, whereas multiple overlapping proceedings can sometimes dilute the focus of the core challenge. The key issue remains whether you can demonstrate that the FIR is malicious, unsupported by evidence, and part of a pattern of retaliatory action. If that foundation is established, the remedies against both the complainants and erring officials become significantly stronger.

Dear Sir/Madam,

Since anticipatory bail, quashing, stay application, NHRC complaint, writ and 223 BNSS complaint are already pending, avoid filing repeated petitions on the same facts.

Unless the High Court has specifically stayed investigation/chargesheet, police may still file chargesheet.

You may submit your evidence/documents to the Investigating Officer and SP by written representation; accused cannot normally demand that Magistrate insert evidence into the case diary.

If police are biased, seek fair/transfer investigation or protection before the High Court, not multiple parallel proceedings.

If quashing fails, contest the case at discharge/trial; civil remedies like defamation/malicious prosecution are stronger after acquittal or quashing.

Advocate Saurabh Agrawal