1 2025:CGHC:3383-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 923 of 2021 1 - Vijay Kumar Das S/o Shri R.B. Das Aged About 45 Years R/o Lig - 66, Avanti Vihar, P.S. Khamardih, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station D.D. Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Shashi Kiran Atbhaiya W/o Shri Bhupendra Singh Atbhaiya Aged About 37 Years R/o Near Mahadeva Talab, Changorabhata, P.S. D.D. Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sajal Kumar Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, P..L. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 20 .01.2025 2 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.P.C.) against the impugned order dated 03.03.2021 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Raipur in Criminal Case No. 1911/2020 whereby the learned trial Court has fixed case for consideration on the application along with the document submitted by the prosecution for hearing of the accused. The petitioner has filed the present petition with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 03.03.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (CG) in Criminal Case No. 1911/2020, to secure the ends of justice. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deem fit, in the interest of justice.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the present petitioner is an accused in the offence of Crime No. 83/2020 registered at Police Station D.D. Nagar, Raipur for the offence under Section 354 and 506 of IPC and after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and Criminal Case No. 1911/2020 is pending before the learned trial Court. During the pendency of the case, on 03.03.2021 when the case was fixed for framing of charge, an application has been filed in the P.S. D.D. Nagar, Raipur along with the examination report of mobile phone and sim card seized from the present petitioner Vijay Kumar Das and a pen drive and requested to take the said documents on record. On 03.03.2021 itself, the learned trial Court has passed the order that before considering application it would be necessary to hear the accused and therefore, they adjourned the case and fixed for 13.05.2021. That order dated 03.03.2021 is under challenge in the present petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the additional evidence cannot be taken on record without affording any proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. After filing of charge-sheet there was no occasion 3 for the prosecution agency to further investigate into the matter and only to introduce the new evidence, the prosecution has filed this application. The further investigation cannot be done without prior permission of the Magistrate concerned and therefore, the document filed by the prosecution cannot be taken on record. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and submitted that from the order dated 03.03.2021, it is quite vivid that the learned trial Court has not admitted the additional evidence on record but they kept it pending for hearing the accused and therefore, no adverse order has been passed against the petitioner and the present petition is pre mature. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. From perusal of the pleadings of the petition, it appears that the petitioner has challenged the order dated 03.03.2021 and it is necessary to reproduce the letter part of order dated 03.03.2021 hereinbelow:- blh Lrj ij Fkkuk Mh-Mh- uxj }kjk ,d vkosnu bl vk’k; dk is’k fd;k x;k fd muds }kjk Fkkuk ds vijk/k dzekad 83@2020 /kkjk 354] 506 Hkk-na-la- i{kdkj ‘kklu fot; dqekj nkl esa vfHk;qDr fot; dqekj nkl ls tIr eksckby jsMeh ekWMy 6izks dk eksckby ftlesa ft;sk dk fle 9424217649 ,oa ,;jVsy dk fle ua 9425506619 dks tIr dj ijh{k.k gsrq Jheku lgk;d iqfyl egkfujh{kd iqfyl eq[;ky; jk;iqj N-x- dks Hkstk tkdj tkap fjiksVZ izkIr fd;k x;kA tkap fjiksVZ o ,d lhycan fyQkQs esa isu MzkbZo is’k fd;s tkus gsrq vuqefr iznku fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;k x;kA mijksDr vkosnu ds ifjis{; esa vfHk;qDr dks lquk tkuk vko’;d izrhr gksrk gSA vr% izdj.k iwoZ fu;r frfFk ij j[kk tkosA vkosnu dh izfr] vfHk;qDr dks nh tkos] ikorh yh tkosA fopkj okn vuqefr iznku dh tkrh gSA it is apparent that the learned trial Court has not passed any order taking the document on record but he simply adjourned the matter for hearing the accused/ petitioner on the application filed by the prosecution for taking the document on record. Since, no effective order has been passed against the 4 petitioner and the Magistrate concerned has not applied his mind till date, we do not find any sufficient ground to interfere in the petition and to set aside the impugned order dated 03.03.2021. 7. Consequently, the petition sans merit and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Sagrika