Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 20551 (CHH)

DURGESH SINGH MAITHIL KASHTRIY v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPCR/277/2025 · 2025-05-07

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:21246-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 277 of 2025 1. Durgesh Singh Maithil Kashtriy S/o Shri Kunwar Singh Maithil Kashtriy Aged About 28 Years R/o Village - Makranpur, P.S. Lalbagh Gramin, Tahsil and Dist. Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 2. Tejeshwari Koushle W/o Durgesh Singh Maithil Kashtriy Aged About 24 Years R/o Village - Makranpur, P.S. Lalbagh Gramin, Tahsil And Dist. Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department of Home, Mantralay Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2. Director General of Police Headquarter New Raipur (Atal Nagar) District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3. Inspector General of Police Durg Range District - Durg Chhattisgarh 4. Superintendent of Police Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 5. Sub Divisional Officer of Police Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 6. Station House Officer P.S. Lalbagh Village, District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 7. Collector Rajnandgaon District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 8. Nandul Ram Agrwal S/o Late Dharmu Ram Agrwal Aged About 63 Years R/o Village - Makranpur, Ps. Lalbagh Gramin, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.05.09 19:12:39 +0530 2 9. Khuman Singh Agrwal S/o Late Heam Das Agrwal Aged About 33 Years R/o Village - Makranpur, Ps. Lalbagh Gramin, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 10. Gendlal Agrwal S/o Shri Tehngu Agrwal Aged About 48 Years R/o Village - Makranpur, Ps. Lalbagh Gramin, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 11. Kirtan Sonwani S/o Baldeo Sonwani Aged About 53 Years R/o Village - Makranpur, Ps. Lalbagh Gramin, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 12. Chintaram Agrwal S/o Feru Ram Agrwal Aged About 61 Years R/o Village - Makranpur, Ps. Lalbagh Gramin, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 13. Mannu Agrwal S/o Ganesh Agrwal Aged About 38 Years R/o Village - Makranpur, P.S. Lalbagh Gramin, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 14. Mohan Agrwal S/o Tehngu Agrwal Aged About 52 Years R/o Village - Makranpur, P.S. Lalbagh Gramin, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ...Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Ravi Kumar Bodhani, Advocate through VC. For Respondents/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 08.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. Ravi Kumar Bodhani, learned counsel for the petitioners through video conferencing. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for respondents No. 1 to 7/State. 3 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers: “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents No. 4 to 7 to initiate a criminal case against the respondents No. 8 to 14 and other persons in accordance with law. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deem fit” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No. 1 has entered into inter-caste marriage with petitioner No. 2 on 17.03.2022 and due to this inter-caste marriage of petitioner No. 1, respondents No. 8 to 14 started harassing the petitioners and their families and the entire family was socially boycotted. He further submits that respondents No. 8 to 14 holding a social meeting, the petitioners were prohibited from any type of transactions and attending any social function. Thereafter, petitioners submit a written complaint dated 21.04.2025 to respondents No. 4 and 7 and legal notice was also send to respondents No. 8 to 14, but no legal action has been taken by respondents No. 4 and 7 against the respondents No. 8 to 14. 4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that the grievance of the petitioners can be very well redressed before the Court 4 below by filing an application under Section 156(3) or 200 of the Cr.P.C. (now, under Section 175(3) or under Section 223 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). He further submits that the controversy involved 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 2020 (Akhilesh Agrawal vs. 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. 5. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioners to avail the appropriate remedy before appropriate Forum. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan