Please meet a good advocate. Writing here will not help you much. 

Only an advocate after scrtrunising relevant papers can guide you properly. 

There are multiple cases against you and by you pending at various courts/ police and the background details of each case is not known. 

Since you await the disposal it would be better that you wait for the disposal because any opinion rendered without knowing the proper details would be a misguidance. 

You may clarify further details from your own advocate. 

You can file SLP in SC against HC order of dismissal of your case 

To expedite an ongoing trial, the proper legal step is to approach the High Court under Section 529 BNSS(corresponding to old Section 483 CrPC). This provision empowers the High Court to exercise general superintendence over lower courts, allowing it to issue direct guidelines or orders to conclude a case expeditiously.

Both Section 182 and Section 211 IPC are non-cognizable offences. By law, police officers cannot register an FIR or initiate an investigation for non-cognizable offences without direct authorization from a Magistrate.

 If your application/complaint under Section 223 BNSS  gets dismissed by the Magistrate, do not panic. Dismissal at this initial stage is not an acquittal of the accused—it is a judicial order that can be challenged and overturned by higher courts.

File a Criminal Revision Application before  Sessions Court OR Calcutta High Court under Section 438/442 BNSS. The Higher Court can set aside the dismissal order and direct the Magistrate to take cognisance or conduct a proper inquiry on merits in your revision petition. 

The police cannot directly file an FIR or a chargesheet against you under Section 182 or Section 211 of the IPC (now Section 217 and Section 248 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, BNS).These offences are non-cognizable. The police do not have the legal authority to register an FIR against you or file a standard police chargesheet for these allegations.

The police simply marking your assault complaint as "false" or "unsubstantiated" in a General Diary Entry (GDE) does not give them the automatic legal right to prosecute you for a false charge.

When you are fighting multiple legal battles at once, it can feel like every door is closing but in the Indian legal system, "everything failing" at the local level is precisely why higher oversight mechanisms exist.

You are not out of options. If the local police and lower courts fail to give you a fair hearing you can  file a petition under Section 528 BNSS (Section 482 CrPC) or a Writ of Mandamus before the Calcutta High Court seeking a transfer of the investigation from local police to an independent agency like the State CID or CBI. High Courts and the Supreme Court frequently transfer investigations away from local police stations when there is demonstrable police bias, retaliatory FIRs, or suppression of evidence.

Police officers do not enjoy absolute immunity when they abuse their authority to fabricate charges or assault citizens.File a detailed sworn affidavit directly to the Registrar (Law) of the NHRC, providing proof that the local police deliberately flouted the NHRC's explicit directive to associate you during the inquiry.

From the facts stated by you, it appears that multiple proceedings are already pending, including anticipatory bail, a quashing petition before the High Court, an application for stay of the criminal proceedings, an NHRC complaint, a complaint case under Section 223 BNSS (earlier Section 200 CrPC), and representations before senior police officers. At this stage, your focus should be on pursuing these remedies systematically rather than initiating multiple parallel proceedings.

Since no charge sheet has been filed till date, you should continue to press your quashing petition and the stay application before the High Court. You may also seek an early hearing if the investigation is being prolonged without justification.

As regards the General Diary Entry (GDE), it is not conclusive proof of the facts recorded therein. If the police have falsely closed your complaint through a GDE without a fair enquiry, you can challenge that action by placing the relevant facts before the Magistrate in your complaint case or, where appropriate, before the High Court. The GDE itself does not bar the Magistrate from independently appreciating the evidence.

If the police file an adverse enquiry report in your Section 223 BNSS complaint, the Magistrate is not bound to accept the police version. The Magistrate may independently examine the complainant and witnesses and decide whether sufficient grounds exist to proceed. Therefore, an adverse police report does not automatically result in dismissal.

If your complaint under Section 223 BNSS is dismissed, you may challenge the dismissal before the appropriate revisional court by filing a Criminal Revision Petition, depending upon the nature of the order and the provisions applicable in your case.

Regarding monitoring of the investigation, you may request appropriate directions from the Magistrate or rely upon the remedies available under the BNSS if the investigation is not being conducted fairly. Whether monitoring under the specific provision cited by you is maintainable will depend upon the stage of the proceedings and the facts of the case.

As regards your concern about proceedings under Section 182 IPC or Section 211 IPC (or their corresponding provisions under the new criminal laws), such action cannot be initiated merely because your complaint was not accepted. These provisions require satisfaction of the statutory ingredients and, in the case of Section 211 IPC, prosecution is ordinarily governed by the procedure prescribed under law. Merely pursuing legal remedies or filing complaints does not automatically expose you to prosecution under these provisions.

At this stage, the most practical course would be:

• pursue an early hearing of the quashing petition and stay application;
• contest any adverse investigation report with documentary evidence already available on record;
• continue the proceedings before the Magistrate under Section 223 BNSS;
• preserve all RTI replies, CCTV footage, call records, medical documents and other public records supporting your case.

Even if one remedy does not succeed, it does not mean all legal remedies are exhausted. Orders of the Magistrate, police authorities and investigative agencies are all subject to judicial scrutiny in accordance with law. It is therefore advisable to proceed strategically through the pending proceedings instead of initiating further parallel litigation unless necessitated by subsequent developments.

Sir/Madam,

The Court is there when police fails to do the needful. You are suggested to apporach for each and every thing when police fails to take required step for anything. At present you are supposed to file 175-3 for monitoring and also monitor the case under 223 BNSS and do everything possible to prove it by brining your cogent evidence. It if fails then also, you may approach higher court challenging the order. 

Dear Sir/Madam,

Do not panic. A police GDE entry or adverse inquiry report is not final proof against you and can be challenged before the Magistrate with CCTV footage, medical records, RTI papers, witnesses and other public documents.

Pursue your complaint under Section 223 BNSS and request investigation under Section 175(3); the Magistrate may order investigation, but day-to-day monitoring cannot ordinarily be demanded. If police file a false closure report, file a detailed protest petition and seek further investigation or cognizance.

If the complaint is dismissed, file a criminal revision before the Sessions Court/High Court within limitation. Police cannot prosecute you merely because your complaint was rejected; a knowingly false complaint must be independently proved. Continue pursuing the pending quashing/stay application and NHRC proceedings through one criminal lawyer to avoid inconsistent pleadings.

Advocate Saurabh Agrawal

Yes it can be challenged 

1. Can the GDE (General Diary Entry) closure by NHRC be challenged?

Yes, an NHRC order closing a complaint as a GDE entry is amenable to judicial review. The Delhi High Court has entertained writ petitions challenging NHRC closure orders. However, the Court may decline interference if the petitioner failed to cooperate with the Commission's inquiry. Since the NHRC itself directed that the inquiry be completed by associating you, and they closed it without doing so, this procedural irregularity strengthens your case. You can challenge this closure by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Calcutta High Court, praying for quashing of the NHRC's closure order and a direction to the Commission to conduct a proper inquiry in accordance with its own directions. The challenge must specifically plead the violation of principles of natural justice.

2. What if the police inquiry report under Section 223 BNSS comes back as false?

Section 223 BNSS governs the procedure for complaints to a Magistrate. A police report deeming your complaint "false" is only an input; the Magistrate is not bound by it. The Magistrate, before taking cognizance, must examine the complainant and witnesses on oath and give the accused a pre-cognizance hearing under the proviso to Section 223(1). Non-compliance with this pre-cognizance hearing renders further proceedings a nullity. If the report is adverse, you must insist that the Magistrate conduct the mandatory inquiry under Section 223(1) and not blindly accept the police report.

3. Chronological legal steps to take immediately

Step 1: File a Criminal Revision (CRR) before the Calcutta High Court under Section 439 BNSS challenging the NHRC's GDE closure, pleading violation of natural justice and the Commission's own direction.

Step 2: Simultaneously, approach the Magistrate where your Section 223 BNSS complaint is pending. File an application objecting to the police report, attaching the anticipatory bail order and quashing petition documents, and request the Magistrate to conduct an independent inquiry under Section 223(1) BNSS, including examining you and your witnesses on oath.

Step 3: If the Magistrate dismisses your complaint under Section 223, immediately file a Criminal Revision (CRR) before the Sessions Court or High Court under Section 439 BNSS challenging the dismissal.

Step 4: File a fresh application under Section 175(3) BNSS before the Magistrate seeking monitoring/direction for investigation of your assault complaint.

4. Can monitoring under Section 175(3) BNSS be sought?

Yes. Section 175(3) BNSS empowers a Magistrate to order an investigation on the application of an aggrieved person whose complaint has been refused registration as an FIR. The Magistrate must hear the police officer and pass a reasoned order before directing investigation. For complaints against public servants, Section 175(4) provides additional safeguards, including a mandatory preliminary inquiry. The Magistrate is required to conduct an inquiry as deemed necessary before directing investigation. The High Court discourages directly approaching it under Section 528 BNSS when the statutory remedy under Section 175(3) before the Magistrate is available.

5. If Section 223 BNSS complaint is dismissed, what to do?

Dismissal of a complaint under Section 223 BNSS is not an acquittal; it is a judicial order that can be challenged. Your primary remedy is to file a Criminal Revision (CRR) before the Sessions Court or the High Court under Section 439 BNSS (corresponding to Section 397 CrPC). The revision petition must demonstrate that the Magistrate's order of dismissal is perverse, arbitrary, or based on a misreading of evidence. The revisional court can set aside the dismissal and direct the Magistrate to proceed further. Additionally, you may invoke the High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS to prevent abuse of process. The Calcutta High Court has held that non-compliance with the pre-cognizance hearing under Section 223(1) is an incurable illegality.

6. Can CRR be filed for expedition of trial?

Yes, but a CRR (Criminal Revision) is not the appropriate remedy for expedition. For expediting an ongoing trial, the proper remedy is to approach the High Court under Section 529 BNSS (corresponding to Section 483 CrPC), which empowers the High Court to exercise general superintendence over subordinate courts and issue directions for expeditious disposal. You can file a petition before the Calcutta High Court under Section 529 BNSS, specifically praying for a direction to the trial court to conclude the proceedings within a stipulated timeframe. Alternatively, you may file an application before the trial court itself under Section 309 BNSS (corresponding to Section 309 CrPC) for speedy disposal, and if the court fails to act, then approach the High Court.

7. Can police file Section 182 or 211 IPC against you?

Sections 182 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code (now corresponding to Sections 228 and 229 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) deal with giving false information to a public servant and false charge of offence, respectively. These are non-cognizable offences. By law, police cannot register an FIR or initiate investigation for non-cognizable offences without direct authorization from a Magistrate under Section 210 BNSS. For the police to proceed against you under these sections, they must first obtain permission from the Magistrate. If they attempt to do so, your anticipatory bail order and pending quashing petition will be relevant documents to demonstrate that the FIR against you itself is under challenge as false and frivolous.

8. If everything fails, what to do?

If all remedies before the Magistrate, Sessions Court, and High Court fail, the ultimate recourse is to approach the Supreme Court of India under Article 136 of the Constitution by filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP). An SLP can challenge the High Court's dismissal of your revision, quashing petition, or writ petition. Additionally, you may file a Review Petition before the High Court under Section 446 BNSS (corresponding to Section 114 CPC read with Order 47 CPC) if there is an error apparent on the face of the record. As a last resort, if your fundamental rights under Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) are continuously violated, you can file a fresh writ petition under Article 226 before the High Court or a writ petition under Article 32 before the Supreme Court, alleging a systematic abuse of the criminal justice system against you.

Dear Client, The general diary entry and the closure report submitted by the police to the NHRC can be legally challenged as closing an assault complaint as unsubstantiated without associating you in an inquiry violates principles of natural justice Since the NHRC itself has already directed the authorities to complete the inquiry by associating you, you can use this directive to contest their bias report and demand a fresh independent fact finding probe Furthermore if your private complaint under section 223 of the BNSS results in a negative or false police inquiry report you are not trapped the magistrate is not legally bound by the police findings You can file a detailed protest petition with supporting evidence cross examine the witnesses and urge the magistrate to take the cognizance independently based on your submitted public documents.

To systematically fight back against these retaliatory tactics you should execute a structured chronological set of legal steps immediately First press hard on your pending quashing petition in the Calcutta High Court to hold the ongoing criminal proceedings under section 74 and 79 of the BNS arguing that the FIR is a malicious counter blast to your RTI applications Secondly instead of seeking monitoring under section 175(3) of the BNSS Since your 223 BNSS complaint is already active you should push the magistrate to conduct an inquiry directly or direct a court monitored probe by an independent agency like the CBI or CID rather than police Thirdly if the 223 BNSS complaint is dismissed at the summoning stage you have the immediate statutory remedy to file a criminal revision application before the session scored or High Court to challenge that dismissal.

Regarding the threat of malicious counter proceedings while police or the accused parties can theoretically attempt to file complaints alleging false charges under old IPC provisions or equivalent BNS sections they cannot do so arbitrarily or automatically without a formal judicial finding that your complaint was maliciously false Because no charge sheet has been filed in the primary FIR against you yet your focus should remain on securing interim protection through your High Court stay and aggressively defending your private complaint. I hope this answer helps, if you have any further query kindly do not hesitate to contact us. Thankyou