Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 27661 (CHH)

SMT. SANGEETA CHAWLA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1877/2025 · 2025-06-17

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:25160-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1877 of 2025 1. Smt. Sangeeta Chawla W/o. Tarun Chawla Aged About 57 Years R/o. 21/6, Nehru Nagar West, Bhilai, P.S. - Supela, District - Durg (C.G.) 2. Tarun Chawla S/o. Late Harikishan Chawla Aged About 65 Years R/o. 21/6, Nehru Nagar West, Bhilai, P.S. - Supela, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Durg Kotwali, District - Durg (C.G.) 2. Dinesh Kumar Tawari S/o. Late Balkishan Tawari Aged About 47 Years R/o. Shri Ram Dev Tyres, Ganjpara, Durg, Tehsil And District - Durg (C.G.) (Complainant) 3. Amit Kumar Baradia S/o. Uttamchand Baradia Aged About 45 Years R/o. 5/9, Rishabh Nagar, Durg, Tehsil And District - Durg (C.G.) (Complainant) ...Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer. For Respondents No. 2 & 3 : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.06.18 18:34:13 +0530 2 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 Ms. Aditi Singhvi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Sakib Ahmed, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No. 1/State and Mr. Rajendra Patel, learned counsel, appearing for respondents No. 2 & 3/complainant. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers: “A. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased quash the FIR bearing Crime No. 110 of 2024 registered at P.S. Durg Kotwali, District Durg (C.G.) dated 28.02.2024 at 22:22 hours registered under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. B. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s)/order(s)/ in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon’ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioners.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter has been compromised outside the Court between the petitioners and respondents No. 2 and 3/complainants and the settlement deed dated 04.06.2025 is annexed as Annexure P/2 in the present petition. 3 4. Learned counsel, appearing for respondents No. 2 & 3/complainant also admit the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the prayers and pleadings made in the petition along with the annexures annexed in this petition. 6. From perusal of the compromise deed dated 04.06.2025, it appears that the petitioners and respondents No. 2 & 3/complainants have already settled their dispute and compromised the matter outside the Court. 7. Taking into consideration that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled by way of compromise deed, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in proceeding any further against the petitioners in this matter. 8. In that view of the matter, the impugned FIR bearing Crime No. 110 of 2024 registered at Police Station Durg Kotwali, District Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the IPC against the petitioners is hereby quashed subject to the condition that the petitioners shall comply with the terms and conditions of the compromise deed dated 04.06.2025 (Annexure P/2) arrived at between the parties. 9. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan