Police, criminal courts must be careful in filing chargesheet, framing charges in civil disputes: SC

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (December 2, 2025) said police must be careful in filing chargesheet and criminal courts in framing charges in cases of pending civil disputes between parties.

A Bench of Justices Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh and Manmohan said in a society governed by the rule of law, the decision to file a chargesheet should be based on the investigating officer’s determination of whether the evidence collected provides a reasonable prospect of conviction.

“This Court would like to emphasise that where there is a pending civil dispute between the parties, the Police and the Criminal Courts must be circumspect in filing a chargesheet and framing charges respectively. The Police at the stage of filing of Chargesheet and the Criminal Court at the stage of framing of Charge must act as initial filters ensuring that only cases with a strong suspicion should proceed to the formal trial stage to maintain the efficiency and integrity of the judicial system,” the Bench said.

It said the tendency of filing chargesheets in matters where no strong suspicion is made out clogs the judicial system. It forces judges, court staff and prosecutors to spend time on trials that are likely to result in an acquittal. This diverts limited judicial resources from handling stronger and more serious cases, contributing to massive case backlogs, the Bench said.

The top court said there can be no analysis at the charge-framing stage as to whether the case would end in conviction or acquittal, but the fundamental principle is that the state should not prosecute citizens without a reasonable prospect of conviction, as it compromises the right to a fair process.

The observation of the apex court came while setting aside an order of the Calcutta High Court which had dismissed the discharge application by an accused in a case of wrongful restraint, voyeurism and criminal intimidation.

The top court said in the present case, the police and the trial court should have been cognisant as there was a pending civil dispute with regard to the property in question as well as a prior subsisting injunction order.