1 2025:CGHC:25168-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 324 of 2025 Smt. Shilpa Kaushik W/o Late Shri Harish Kaushik Aged About 42 Years R/o Raipur Road Parsada, P.S. Chakarbhata, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Home Department Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Naya Raipur Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Superintendent Of Police Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - S.H.O. P.S. Chakarbhatha District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Savita Sahu W/o Shri Basant Kumar Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Jairam Nagar, P.S. Masturi District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravnindra Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 18.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Ravnindra Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.06.19 10:38:16 +0530 2 appearing for the State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of MANDAMUS directing the respondent police authority to conduct proper and fair investigation on the complaint of the petitioner and register the F.I.R against the respondent No. 4 for the offences punishable U/s 318 (2), 318 (3), 319 (2) and 318 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 10.2. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may, deems fit and proper may also be awarded to the petitioner including the cost of the petition.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the inaction of the respondent police authority in not registering the F.I.R. despite presence of ingredients of cognizable offence is illegal, improper and contrary to the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court. The petitioner has also made complaint under Section 154 (3) of Criminal Procedure Code before the Superintendent of Police Bilaspur, Dist-Bilaspur (C.G.) but the F.I.R. has not been registered. The respondent No.4 has already admitted payment of Rs. 12,00,000/- to the petitioner to secure the job by illegal manner, therefore prima facie there is admission of crime and the police authority have ought to have registered the F.I.R. against the respondent No. 04. Cognizable offences under section 318 (2), 318 (3), 319 (2) and 318 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. has been made out from the complaint but even thereafter the respondent No.3 has not registered the F.I.R. till date which is illegal, improper and contrary to the law. 3 4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that the grievance of the petitioner can be very well redressed before the Court below by filing an application under Section 156(3) or 200 of the Cr.P.C. (now, under Section 175(3) or under Section 223 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). He further submits that the controversy involved in the present matter has already been decided by the High Court of Allahabad in Misc. Bench No. 24492 of 2020 : Waseem Haider vs. State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home Others vide judgment and order dated 14.12.2020 as well as by this Court in WPCR No. 333 of 2020 (Akhilesh Agrawal vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) decided on 12.04.2023, dismissing the said petition, hence, the present petition be also dismissed in terms of the said order. 5. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy before appropriate Forum. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet