1 2025:CGHC:17136-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 202 of 2025  Sangya Lal Soloman W/o Aaditya Soloman Aged About 33 Years R/o Gayatri Girls Hostel, Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. Superintendent Of Police, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 3. Station House OfÏcer, Chakradhar Nagar, District Raigarh (C.G.) 4. Mahila Thana, Station Chowk, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 5. Rashmi Pathak W/o Umesh Pathak Aged About 58 Years R/o Eden Garden, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 6. Nitish Lal S/o Nitin Umesh Lal Aged About 34 Years R/o Eden Garden, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 7. Aatish Pathak S/o Umesh Pathak Aged About 28 Years R/o Eden Garden, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 8. Umesh Pathak Aged About 55 Years R/o Eden Garden, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 9. Pastor Ajay Lal Aged About 63 Years R/o Vishwashgadh Church Of North India, Raigarh, C.G. 10. Pastor Sumendu Aged About 55 Years R/o Vishwashgadh Church Of North India, Raigarh, C.G. ---- Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, G.A. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 15.04.2025 Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 1. Heard Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, G.A., for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- 10.1 That, the Respondent no. 1-4 be directed to take action against respondent No. 5 -10 for exercising exorcism upon the petitioner 10.2. That, the Respondent No. 9 and 10 be prosecuted for outraging the modesty of the petitioner. 10.3 That, the Respondent No. 2, 3 & 4 be directed to register that crime upon the respondents. 10.4 That, the Respondent No. 1-4 be directed to ensure the liberty guaranteed under article 21 of constitution of India. 10.5 That, the petitioner be allowed to live and stay wherever she wants. 10.6 That, the Hon’ble Court further pleased to grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of 3 justice and fair play. 3. Brief facts of the case is that, the petitioner is challenging the arbitrary act of respondent No. 5-8 who are trying to make her captive and has already taken action of witchcraft therefore petitioner is very much scared and is being followed by respondent No. 5-8 wherever she is going and was compelled to leave Raigarh therefore she is taking shelter of this Hon’ble court for the free movement and also reserve the free movement of life as guaranteed under article 21 of the Constitution of India. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the garb of exorcism respondent No. 9 and 10 have exploited the petitioner and tried to outrage the modesty, the petitioner was very uncomfortable and scared but respondent No. 5 to 8 were supporting the illegal act of respondent No. 9 & 10, therefore, the petitioner filed complaint before respondent No. 2, 3 & 4. However, despite complaint has been made, no action has been taken by the respondents No. 2 to 4. 5. We have perused the prayers and pleadings made in the writ petition. 6. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that the grievance of the petitioner can be very well redressed before the Court below by filing an application under Section 156 (3) or 200 of the Cr.P.C. He further submits that the controversy involved 4 in the present matter has already been decided by the High Court of Allahabad in Misc. Bench No.24492 of 2020 : Waseem Haider Vs. State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home Others vide judgment and order dated 14.12.2020 as well as by this Court in WPCR No. 333 of 2023 (Akhilesh Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) decided on 12.04.2023, dismissing the said petition, hence, the present petition be also dismissed in terms of the said order. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy before appropriate Forum. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti