1 2025:CGHC:8125 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 446 of 2021 Jeevanlal Kamde S/o Dukhuram Aged About 51 Years R/o Village, Post, Police Station And Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble S hri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 17/02/2025 1. The present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed by the petitioner for quashing of the FIR of Crime No. 353 of 2018, registered at Police Station Balod, District Balod for the offence under section 174-A of the IPC, which has been registered on the instance of learned Chief Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN 2 Judicial Magistrate, Balod. The petitioner has prayed the following reliefs in the prayer of his petition: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and quash the FIR No. 353/2018 dated 20.09.2018 (ANNEXURE P-1) by which upon instruction of Court of Learned CJM Balod the Police Station Balod, District Balod, Chhattisgarh, in the interest of justice.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was an accused in the offence registered at Police Station Balod for Crime No. 23 of 2018, registered for the offence under section 420 of IPC, which was registered on the complaint made by one Bhupat Singh. The allegation against the present petitioner in the said Crime No. 23 of 2018, registered at Police Station Balod was that he received Rs. 1,40,000/- from the complainant Bhupat Singh on the pretext of providing job as constable in Police Department and when he failed to do so, he has not returned the money obtained by him. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the petitioner on 26.02.2018 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balod and the Criminal Case No. 168 of 2018 was registered before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balod. Since, the petitioner was not appeared in Criminal Case No. 168 of 2018, arrest warrant was issued on 11.07.2018. Since, the warrant of arrest could not be served upon the petitioner and he could not be arrested, the proceeding under section 82 of CRPC was proposed by the learned trial Court and thereafter vide order dated 02.08.2018, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balod has directed to publish a proclamation, as provided 3 under section 82 of CRPC. In pursuance to order dated 02.08.2018, a proclamation was published on 08.08.2018 and despite that the petitioner has not made his appearance before the learned trial Court and then vide order dated 14.09.2018, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balod has directed to lodge a report under section 174-A of IPC against the petitioner and pursuant to the order dated 14.09.2018, the present FIR of Crime No. 353 of 2018 has been registered on 20.09.2018 for the offence under section 174-A of IPC, which is under challenge in the present petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that although the FIR under section 420 of IPC was registered against the present petitioner vide Crime No. 23 of 2018 on the report made by Bhupat Singh, but the same has been compromised with the complainant and the FIR of Crime No. 23 of 2018 registered at Police Station Balod, dated 17.01.2018 for the offence under section 420/ 34 of IPC and the consequential Criminal Case No. 168 of 2018 is quashed by the learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 19.03.2021, passed in CRMP No. 128 of 2021. Since, the original offence has been compromised and the FIR has been quashed, the present FIR, which is the derivative of the original FIR, may also be quashed. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the petition. 4 6. It is not in dispute in the present case that the FIR of Crime No. 23 of 2018, registered at Police Station Balod, District Balod for the offence under section 420/34 of IPC has been quashed by the learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 19.03.2021, passed in CRMP No. 128 of 2021. The present FIR of Crime No. 313 of 2018 is the derivative of the original FIR of Crime No. 23 of 2018. Since, the original FIR has been quashed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, it would be a futile exercise to continue the FIR of Crime No. 353 of 2018, registered at Police Station Balod. This Court would deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly in view of the fact that the original FIR of Crime No. 23 of 2018 has already been quashed, the present FIR of Crime No. 353 of 2018, registered at Police Station Balod for the offence under section 174-A of IPC may also be quashed, as the original offence has already been quashed. 7. In the result, the present petition is allowed and the FIR of Crime No. 353 of 2018, registered at Police Station Balod for the offence under section 174-A of IPC dated 20.09.2018 is hereby quashed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved