1 2025:CGHC:15541 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1150 of 2025 1 - Hemraj Bareth @ Pappu S/o Kangalu Bareth Aged About 31 Years Occupation Transporter, Nivasi Kabir Chowk, Raigarh Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Triapathi, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 02/04/2025 1. The present Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 01.03.2025 passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in Criminal Revision No. 41/2024, whereby the criminal revision filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 24.02.2024 the police of Police Station, Jutemill Raigarh received a secret information with respect to the engagement of the petitioner in chit gambling and when he 2 conducted raid in the house of the petitioner, he started creating nuisance and exhorted the raiding party, therefore, the preventive action has been taken against the petitioner under Section 107, 116(3) of Cr.P.C. and Istgasha was produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Raigarh, on 24.02.2024 he was asked to furnish the surety for keeping peace in the vicinity. 3. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.02.2024 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Raigarh and challenging the said order by which he was asked to furnish surety under the preventive action by filing the criminal revision before the learned revisional Court which has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 01.03.2025 and the said order is under challenge in the present criminal miscellaneous petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is only an apprehension under which the action has been taken against the petitioner there is no any incident occurred on 24.02.2024 there is no article have been seized with respect to the gambling chit or any other articles but only to secure their personal grudge the police persons have submitted the Istgasha before the Sub Divisional Magistrate without there being any sufficient reason, therefore, the impugned order dated 24.02.2024 as well as order dated 01.03.2025 passed by learned revisional Court may be set aside holding the action of the police authorities are illegal. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State supported the impugned orders and prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. From perusal of the order dated 24.02.2024, it is quite vivid that on being Istgasha submitted by the police of Police Station Jutemill, Raigarh, considering the apprehension of breach of peace and public 3 tranquility the act of the petitioner, he was detained for preventive ation an Istgasha was produced. It is also reflects that from the material annexed with the petition that on 24.02.2024 when the police party went to the house of the petitioner for conducting raid as they have received secret information about engagement of the petitioner in chit gambling, he created nuisance, therefore, considering the apprehension of breach of peace in the vicinity they have taken preventive measures against the petitioner. 7. From perusal of the entire material annexed with the petition, I do not find any sufficient ground to interfere with the petition and hold that action taken by the police authorities are without any basis or frivolous. 8. Consequently, the petition does not have any merits and liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.04.03 19:38:02 +0530