1 2025:CGHC:6242-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1120 of 2020 1 - Sidharth Baghel S/o Shri Sukhdev Baghel Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Telasi, Police Station Gidhpuri, District Balodabazaar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Superintendent Of Police, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Station House Officer Police Station Supela, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Deepak Chanpuriya S/o Shri B.M. Chanpuriya Aged About 36 Years R/o Plot No. 102, Pragati Nagar, Main Road, Risali, Bhilai, Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Rajni Soren, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 04/02/2025 2 1. Heard Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer for the Respondent/State, Ms. Rajni Soren, Advocate, appearing for the respondent no.3. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the FIR of Crime No. 285/2020 registered at police station, Supela District- Durg for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC and he claimed the following relief in the petition: "it is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and quash the impugned FIR and stop investigation initiated against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned FIR bearing crime no. 285/2020 for the offences punishable U/s 420 of I.P.C. at P.S. Supela, District Durg (C.G.), in the interest of justice accordingly. " 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the State would submit that the petitioner has challenged the FIR whereas after investigation charge-sheet has been filed before the learned trial Court and charge against the petitioner has also been framed on 12.06.2024 for the offence under Section 420 of IPC and trial of the case is in progress and recording of evidence is going on. 4. He would further submits that the order framing charge has also not been challenged in the present petition except the FIR. 5. The submissions made by learned counsel for the respondent/State have not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and he also submits that the trial of the case is in progress. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.3 would also submit that the respondent no.3 has filed their return in which they have submitted that it is the dispute between the parties with respect to the cheating with the complainant and has not refund the amount which is having various facets of factual dispute which 3 cannot be determined in the present petition without recording evidence of the parties before the learned trial Court. Charges have been framed and the recording of the evidence of the witnesses are going on, therefore, she also prayed for dismissal of the present petition. 7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and charges have been framed and the case is fixed for recording of prosecution evidence, We do not found any good ground to interfere in the matter in such belated stage. Further, as the matter relates to offence under Section 420 of IPC which is having various factual dispute between the parties in the case, which is to be decided after trial of the case. 8. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Alok ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.02.07 19:17:54 +0530