1 2025:CGHC:6228-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 430 of 2025 1 - Kachra Bai Sahu W/o Punni Ram Sahu Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Jharna Police Station Nagarda District - Sakti (C.G.) (Accused On Bail) 2 - Puni Ram Sahu S/o Ram Prasad Sahu Aged About 75 Years R/o Village Jharna Police Station Nagarda District - Sakti (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Babita Sahu W/o Santosh Kumar Sahu Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Jharna Police Station Nagarda District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Thana Incharge / Sho Nagarda Tahsil And District - Sakti (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Punam Sahu W/o Chhatram Sahu Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Jharna Police Station Nagarda District - Sakti (C.G.) (Complainant ) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Jha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, P.L. Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 04 .02.2025 1. Heard, Mr. Sandeep Jha, Advocate learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer, for the Respondent/ State. 2. The petitioners have prayed the following reliefs in the petition:- “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and quash the impugned first information report (0153/2023), set aside the charge- sheet and also quash the cognizance order dated 12.08.2024 and 2 entire criminal proceedings/ initiated against the petitioner’s pursuant to impugned first information report (0153/2023 dated 23.11.2023 for the offence punishable under Section 354, 354 (D), 452, 294, 506 and 323 registered at P.S. Nagarda, Dist- Sakti (CG), in the interest of justice.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that On 29.09.2023 at about 5.30 am, when the victim went to the garden, her brother in law was walking on terrace and he followed her in garden. When the victim went to the bathroom, the brother in law of the victim removed the curtain of bathroom without her permission and entered into the bathroom and started doing obscene acts. When the victim shouted, her sister in law named Babita came there and saw the matter and asked her husband that why he came here and then he twisted her hands, therefore, her sister in law snatched her mobile phone and slapped him. The complainant/ respondent no. 2 has lodged report against the petitioners with the aforesaid allegation hence present petition has been filed to quash the impugned FIR as also order dated 12.08.2024 and the criminal proceeding initiated against the petitioners pursuant to the impugned FIR. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner as well as the private respondent are belonging to the same family and there was some family dispute regarding the agricultural land between the petitioners, therefore, the present FIR has been registered against them. The allegation against the petitioners are false and fabricated. He further stated that the petitioner No. 1 and 2 are aged about 70 & 75 years old respectively and they are not involved in any criminal case and also suffering from many ailments like heart disease, diabetes etc. he would further submit that the husband of the petitioner No. 3/ Santosh and the present petitioners have been benefited by anticipatory bail by this Court in the present case. 3 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that as the trial is in progress no interference is required, and the direction may be issued to the learned trial Court for expeditious trial of the case. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. From perusal of the record it transpires that the trial of the present case is in progress and the evidence of the private respondent has already been recorded before the learned trial Court. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and further considering the fact that the trial is in progress, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter at this belated stage, however, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. 8. With this observation, the present petition is disposed of. 9. A copy of this order should be forwarded to trial Court concerned for necessary compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Sagrika SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.02.10 16:12:45 +0530