1 2025:CGHC:39051 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1024 of 2022 1 - Rajnarayan Sahu @ Raju S/o Late Shri Sunderlal Sahu Aged About 56 Years R/o Nehru Chowk, P.S. City Kotwali Balodabazar, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, District : Balodabazar- Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sub-Divisional Magistrate Balodabazar,, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent Of Police Baloda Bazar, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 4 - Station House Officer Police Station City Kotwali,, District : Balodabazar- Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Prakash Tiwari along with Mr. Palash Tiwari, Advocates For State : Mr. Swajeet Ubeja, PL Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.08.06 18:59:39 +0530 2 Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 06/08/2025 1. The present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, instituted under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is seeking quashment of F.I.R. No. 0876 dated 21.12.2021, lodged at Police Station City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, for the offence punishable under Section 4(A) of the Public Gambling (Chhattisgarh Amendment) Act, 1867 and the proceeding arising therefrom. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that as per the arrest memo drawn in connection with the said F.I.R., the applicant was shown to have been arrested at 15:10 hours on 21.12.2021 from New Bus Stand, Baloda Bazar. However, a careful perusal of the F.I.R. reveals that in Column No. 3(b), the time of receiving the information at the concerned police station is mentioned as 16:10 hours i.e. one hour after the alleged time of arrest. This indicates that the applicant was arrested prior to the lodging of the F.I.R., which is neither permissible nor legally sustainable. It is highly objectionable that the police proceeded to arrest the applicant before registering the F.I.R., a practice that is impermissible under the law. He would submit that given the above facts and circumstances, it clearly appears that the applicant has been implicated in a false, frivolous, and fabricated case, driven by malicious intent. Therefore, even if the allegations made in the F.I.R. are taken at face value and accepted in their entirety, they do not prima facie constitute any offence 3 or make out a case against the accused. He would submit that earlier the petitioner filed a contempt petition No. 807/2019, in which, this Hon’ble Court had directed the Contemnor, who was the Superintendent of Police, Baloda-Bazaar at the relevant point of time, to remain in attendance before this Court. Subsequently, the said authority appeared before this Court and made a statement that his name was removed from the surveillance list. Accordingly, the contempt was dropped. According to the petitioner since then, the police persons are keeping malice intention against the petitioner and they are made their efforts to implicate the petitioner, who is a businessman, in false and frivolous cases and in that process, the impugned FIR has been registered against the petitioner. 3. Per Contra, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submission of the applicant. He would submit that the authorities are acting in accordance with law that too after following the due procedure. In fact, they have not ill intention towards the petitioner and they are discharging their duties. According to the learned counsel, during the patrolling, the police came to know that the petitioner and others are playing gambling at Bus stand of Baloda Bazaar. On the basis of the said information, the police reached the spot and caught red-handed and apprehended the petitioner. On finding the cognizable offense committed by the petitioner, the police authorities commenced the investigation. According to the learned counsel, just after some time, the petitioner started quarreling with the seizure witnesses and for the above incident, the 4 Istagasa was registered. Therefore, it cannot be said that the police are acting with malafide intention against the petitioner. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon careful perusal of the record, this Court finds merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant. As reflected in the arrest memo, the applicant was shown to have been arrested at 15:10 hours on 21.12.2021, whereas the F.I.R. itself records that the information was received by the concerned police station only at 16:10 hours i.e., one hour after the arrest. This sequence of events clearly indicates that the applicant was arrested prior to the registration of the F.I.R., which is impermissible in law and vitiates the entire proceedings. 6. The explanation offered by the State regarding the sequence of events does not sufficiently rebut this fundamental procedural illegality. The allegations of mala fide cannot be brushed aside, particularly in light of the earlier contempt proceedings, where the applicant had raised concerns regarding vindictive action by the local police. 7. In view of the above circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue would amount to abuse of the process of law and cause miscarriage of justice. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. 5 8. Consequently, F.I.R. No. 0876 dated 21.12.2021, registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, for the offence under Section 4(A) of the Public Gambling (Chhattisgarh Amendment) Act, and all proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Rahul/Gowri