2025:CGHC:17001 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 466 of 2025 Nishchal Singh S/o Late Mehar Singh Aged About 80 Years R/o Takhatpur, P.S. Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - Smt. Indrajeet Muchchhal W/o Late Tejpal Singh Aged About 37 Years 2 - Khushi Muchchhal D/o Late Tejpal Singh Aged About 20 Years 3 - Simar Muchchhal S/o Late Tejpal Singh Aged About 18 Years 4 - Ranvir Muchchhal S/o Late Tejpal Singh Aged About 16 Years Minor Through Legal Natural Guardian Mother Indrajeet Muchchhal, W/o Late Tejpal Singh All R/o. Village- Devri, P.S. City Kotwali Mungeli, District- Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Applicant : Ms Laxmin Tondey, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 11.04.2025 1. Present petition is filed against the impugned order dated 18.02.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions judge, FTC, Mungeli, CG in Criminal Appeal-44 of 2024, whereby the appeal filed by the applicant herein has been dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that respondents are prosecuting an application filed under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.04.23 10:53:47 +0530 Crr 466 of 2025 2 Violence Act, 2005 (For short, ‘Domestic Violence Act’) before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mungeli, District Mungeli, CG in Criminal Complaint Case-43 of 2023, in which she impleaded the present applicant as Non-Applicant-1, and two other Non-Applicants, who are, Chotu, s/o Nischal Singh, and Monu, s/o Nischal Singh as Non-Applicants 2 and 3 respectively. During the proceeding, an application has been filed by the present respondents for correction of names of Non-Applicants 2 and 3, and wanted to carry out the correct names as Rajender Singh, s/o Nischal Singh, and Gajender Singh, s/o Nischal Singh as Non-Applicants 2 and 3 respectively. After hearing the parties, the learned trial court has allowed the application vide order dated 18.11.2024, and permitted the applicants to carryout the necessary amendment/correction in names of Non-Applicants 2 and 3, and to make them party with their correct name. 3. The said order dated 18.11.2024 was challenged by the present applicant before the learned Additional Sessions judge, FTC, Mungeli, CG in Criminal Appeal-44 of 2024. After hearing the parties, the appeal filed by the present applicant has been dismissed on 18.02.2025, which is under challenge in the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicants have not explained any proper reason for not making them as party Non-Applicants by their correct names, and it is only to delay the proceeding of the case, they filed application for correction of their names. Non-Applicants have been added on the false allegation, and considering the nature of allegation, and facts of the case, their names cannot be permitted to be corrected in the cause title of the complaint, therefore, the impugned order may be set aside. Crr 466 of 2025 3 5. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, and perused the documents annexed with the petition. 6. Present is a revision filed against the order passed by the appellate Court, who has dismissed the appeal filed by the applicant, filed against the order dated 18.11.2024, passed by the learned trial Court. The issue before the learned trial Court was that the Non-applicants 2 and 3 have been made as party Non-applicants with their nick name, whereas, when the applicants get their correct names, they have moved an application for substitution of their names in the cause-title of the complaint. It is not case of the applicant that both these persons, Non-applicants 2 and 3 are not the sons of Non-applicant- 1/applicant. The learned trial Court has also considered that changing the names of Non-applicants 2 and 3 in the cause-title does not prejudice the merits of the case, or rights of the parties, and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, allowed their application for amendment in the names of Non-applicants 2 and 3. The learned appellate Court also affirmed the said order in the appeal field by the applicant. 7. Considering the entire material produced in the present petition, this Court is also in agreement with the order passed by the trial Court, as well as the appellate court that the learned trial Court has rightly allowed the application for correction/amendment of the names of Non-applicants 2 and 3. 8. Consequently, present petition does not have any merits, which is liable to be, and it is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma