Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21389 (CHH)

SHANI @ SONU KASHYAP (IN PERSON) v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1589/2025 · 2025-05-07

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:21168-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1589 of 2025 Shani @ Sonu Kashyap (In Person) S/o Hirday Kashyap Aged About 25 Years R/o Rahod, Ward No. 07, P.S. Shiorinarayan, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Home, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - The Director General of Police Police Department, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent of Police Janjgir- Champa, District Janjgir- Champa Chattisgarh 4 - Station House Officer Police Station Pamgarh, District Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh 5 - Monika Kashyap D/o Late Ramcharan Kashyap Aged About 24 Years R/o Old Bus Stand Imalipara, Madhuripara, Madhuri Bhawan Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh Permanent R/o Ward No. 10, Chirmiri, Manendragarh, District Chirmiri-Manendragarh-Bharatpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Shani @ Sonu Kashyap, in person For Respondents-State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.05.09 10:29:33 +0530 2 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. Shani @ Sonu Kashyap, petitioner in person as well as Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondents No.1 to 4. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- “1. That, Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the instant petition under section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023 filed by the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 2. That, Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the FIR bearing Crime no.452/2023 registered on 31.10.2023 at police station Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh filed under section 354 of I.P.C. in the interest of justice. 3. That, Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash entire charge sheet Criminal Case No.1020/2023 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Pamgarh- District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh against the petitioners under section 354 of I.P.C., in the interest of justice. 4. That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly grant 3 any other reliefs in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon’ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case, are that the complainant victim has made complaint to the concerned police station Pamgarh alleging that on 31.10.2023, when tshe was gone to bathroom near Darri Talab at village Chandipara, at that relevant time, the petitioner came near Hand pump and tried to outrage of her modesty by pressing her breast and when she screened, he ran away from the spot. Based upon such complaint, the concerned police station has registered FIR on 31.10.2023 in connection with Crime No.04522023 for the offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the present petitioner. 4. The petitioner in person submits that he is innocent and falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the victim is a major girl and it is not possible to commit alleged offence at open place as also the investigating agency did not take proper investigation before registration of the FIR. As such, the FIR, charge-sheet as well as criminal case be quashed. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that petitioner has committed heinous offence of outraging the modesty of the complainant, as such, an offence under Section 354 of the IPC was registered against him. He further submits that charge-sheet has been filed and on account of non-apperance of the petitioner, 4 charges have not been framed. Therefore, instant petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant documents available with the instant petition. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it transpires from the record that petitioner after being enlarged on anticipatory bail, has failed to appear before the trial Court, on account of which charges have not been framed and after having perused the statement of the victim under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as also after perusing the FIR, it is apparent that the petitioner has tried to outrage the modesty of the complainant. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that no prima facie case is made out for quashing of the FIR, charge sheet along with subsequent proceedings. 8. Accordingly, instant CRMP is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu