Resisting One's Own Medical Exam Does Not Obstruct a Public Servant, Supreme Court Quashes FIR
A bench of Justices K.V. Viswanathan and Arun Palli quashed an FIR and chargesheet against a forest department employee for resisting her own medical examination, holding no offence was made out under Section 186 IPC, Section 189 IPC, or the Maharashtra Police Act.
The Supreme Court on 12 August 2026 quashed an FIR and criminal chargesheet registered against Ashwini Anantrao Deshpande, a lekhapal at the Forest Range Office, Paratwada, Maharashtra. The Court held that her conduct — initially resisting a medical examination to which she was subjected — could not, at its highest, constitute obstruction of a public servant under Section 186 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The bench also found the charges under Section 189 IPC and Sections 110 and 117 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 wholly inapplicable. The Bombay High Court at Nagpur had declined to quash the proceedings. The Supreme Court reversed that order entirely and directed that all proceedings arising from FIR No. 0131/2021 stand quashed.
How the Case Reached the Supreme Court
On 4 May 2021, the Forest Range Officer, Paratwada, sent a letter to Police Station Achalpur, District Amravati Rural, reporting that Deshpande had been found in an intoxicated state at 1:00 p.m. and was causing a disturbance. She was taken to Sub-District Hospital, Achalpur, for a medical examination, accompanied by police personnel including Sub-Inspector Snehal Aade, two constables, and a female soldier.
According to the FIR lodged by Sub-Inspector Aade, Deshpande tried to resist the examination and was “creating a scene” at the hospital. The police personnel persuaded her, blood was collected, and the report was sent to the police station. FIR No. 0131/2021 was registered on 4 May 2021 for offences under Sections 186 and 189 IPC and Sections 110 and 117 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. A chargesheet followed, bearing No. 01/2021 (NCR No. 113/2021), pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Achalpur.
Deshpande moved the Bombay High Court at Nagpur under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — the successor provision to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure — seeking to quash the FIR and the chargesheet. By judgment dated 19 November 2025 in Criminal Appeal (APL) No. 1684/2024, the High Court declined to exercise that jurisdiction. She then approached the Supreme Court by way of a special leave petition.
What the Supreme Court Held on Section 186 IPC
Section 186 IPC makes it an offence to voluntarily obstruct any public servant in the discharge of his public functions. The Court examined the prosecution's own case and found a critical undisputed fact: Deshpande did ultimately undergo the medical examination. The prosecution witnesses confirmed as much.
Taking the prosecution's case at its highest, the Court concluded that the act attributed to Deshpande — initial resistance to her own medical examination — would not be covered by the phrase “voluntarily obstructs any public servant in the discharge of his public function.” The Court's reasoning turned on the nature of what was being resisted. The act in question was a medical examination directed at the accused herself, not interference with a distinct official function being performed towards a third party or in the public domain. That resistance, followed by compliance, did not amount to the kind of obstruction that Section 186 was designed to punish.
On Section 189 IPC and the Maharashtra Police Act Charges
Section 189 IPC is attracted when a person threatens injury to a public servant — or to a person in whom such public servant is interested — in order to induce the public servant to do or refrain from doing some act connected with the exercise of his public functions. The Court found that the requirements were “on the face of it” not attracted by anything in the prosecution's case.
The Court then examined the Maharashtra Police Act charges. Section 110 of that Act prohibits, among other things, indecent language or disorderly behaviour in a street, place of public resort, office, station, or station house. Section 112 concerns threatening, abusive, or insulting words or behaviour with intent to provoke a breach of the peace, or conduct whereby a breach of the peace may be occasioned. Section 117 prescribes penalties for contraventions of Sections 99 to 116.
The bench said it was “at a loss to understand” how Sections 110, 112, and 117 of the Maharashtra Police Act were attracted on the facts of this case. No specific finding was recorded by the High Court that addressed this gap, and the Supreme Court did not fill it in the prosecution's favour.
The High Court's Error
The Bombay High Court had declined to interfere under Section 528 BNSS. That provision, like its predecessor, allows a High Court to quash criminal proceedings where the FIR discloses no cognisable offence or where the continuation of proceedings would amount to an abuse of process. The Supreme Court found the High Court's refusal incorrect. In its analysis, the Court applied the settled standard of taking the prosecution's case at its highest — and found that even on that standard, no offence was made out under any of the provisions invoked.
The Court's approach reflected the principle that allowing a criminal proceeding to continue where the basic legal ingredients of the offence are absent serves no purpose and amounts to subjecting an accused to needless harassment. The prosecution had not demonstrated any element of the charged offences that survived scrutiny.
Order
The Supreme Court allowed the criminal appeal, set aside the Bombay High Court's judgment dated 19 November 2025, and quashed the proceedings arising out of FIR No. 0131/2021 dated 4 May 2021 registered at Police Station Achalpur, District Amravati Rural, Maharashtra. The consequential chargesheet/final report bearing No. 01/2021 (NCR No. 113/2021) pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Achalpur, also stands quashed. Pending applications, if any, were disposed of.