Full Breakdown
Madhya Pradesh High Court Rejects Petition to Quash Hijab-Related FIR at Damoh School
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
On August 4 2026, Justice Himanshu Joshi of the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s Jabalpur Bench dismissed three petitions seeking to quash a First Information Report (FIR) filed against four individuals connected with Ganga Jamuna Higher Secondary School in Damoh. The court held that the allegations—ranging from compulsory hijab and Urdu instruction to prohibition of Hindu symbols and alleged threats—could not be dismissed as “inherently absurd” and must be examined at trial.
Background & Context
The controversy began in May 2023 when a school poster showing several girl students, including those from non-Muslim communities, wearing headscarves went public. Right-wing groups alleged that the school was imposing Islamic practices on Hindu and Jain students. The district collector ordered an inquiry, leading to the registration of an FIR on June 7 2023 (Crime No. 498/2023) at Kotwali police station. The FIR invoked Sections 295-A, 120-B and 506 Part-II of the IPC, along with provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act and the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act 2021.
Initial arrests in June 2023 included principal Afsha Sheikh, teacher Anas Athar Ali and peon/security guard Rustam Ali. Later investigations named former office-bearer Shailendra Kumar Jain and community member Abdul Wasim Bari.
Data & Statistics
- The FIR alleged compulsory hijab from Class VI onward, mandatory Urdu instruction, enforced prayer recitations, and bans on wearing tilak and kalawa.
- By the August 2026 order, 32 of 33 prosecution witnesses had already been examined, indicating the trial was at an advanced stage.
Official Statements & Responses
The bench rejected the petitioners’ claim that the FIR should be quashed because the informant was an enquiry committee rather than a direct victim, noting that the Freedom of Religion Act requires a complainant’s statement but the court could not assess its adequacy at the quashing stage.
Addressing the defence’s argument that the sanction under Section 196 CrPC was obtained only on September 18 2023, after the charge sheet, the court cited Supreme Court precedents (*Dharmesh @ Nanu Nitinbhai Shah* and *State of MP vs Bhooraji*) to hold that a later sanction does not automatically invalidate cognizance when the trial has progressed.
The court also dismissed reliance on parents’ affidavits stating that only government-prescribed textbooks were used, ruling that such affidavits could not negate the broader material collected during investigation.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the high court’s willingness to allow criminal proceedings to continue when allegations involve potential violations of religious freedom and coercion, even amid politically sensitive contexts. By refusing to quash the FIR, the bench signals that claims of forced religious practices will be examined on their factual merits rather than dismissed on procedural technicalities.
What's Next
The trial will proceed with the remaining prosecution witness to be examined and subsequent judicial determinations on the merits of the accusations. No further dates have been scheduled in the sources.