1 2025:CGHC:30441-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2091 of 2025 Vikas Kumar Manjhi S/o Shri Chandicharan Manjhi, Aged About 52 Years (Wrongly Mentioned As Vikas Manjhi In Annexure P/1), R/o Geetanjali Vihar, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 Yatindra Burman S/o Amarchand Burman, Aged About 29 Years R/o House No. B/2, Alka Avenue, Uslapur, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 Vijay Lakshmi Sharma, W/o Late Chandrahas Sharma, Aged About 62 Years R/o Near Sakri Middle School, Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Marhas, Advocate For Respondent /State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.07.07 12:37:17 +0530 2 Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 04/07/2025 1. Heard Mr. S.S. Marhas, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned G.A. for the State. 2. The instant CRMP has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C with the following prayer:- “1. Quash the impugned First Information Report No. 279/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur dated 12.03.2025 against the Petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code; & II. Quash the charge sheet (Annexure P/1) bearing number 494/2025 dated 07.06.2025 filed by the Police of Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur against the Petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code in consequence of First Information Report No. 279/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur before Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Bilaspur, & III. Quash the order taking cognizance dated 09.06.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District 3 Bilaspur in Criminal Case No. 20540/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code and quash the consequential criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 20540/2025 pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh Annexure P/2) against the Petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, in the interest of justice.” 3. Facts of the case in brief is that, the Respondent No. 2 made a written complaint against the petitioner and three other accused persons stating that they had purchased land bearing Khasra 448/11/ga on 14.01.2021 and land bearing Khasra No. 448/37/ga on 21.02.2021 by way of registered sale deed. Further, as per the written complaint, the father of Respondent No. 2 only after verifying the documents i.e, B1, Khasra Panchshala, Diversion and Demarcation Report agreed to buy the lands. Later, when the Respondent No. 2 made a deal to sell the lands, he received legal notice from Respondent No. 3 stating that Respondent No. 3 had not engaged any counsel for sending the earlier notice and she made her signature wherever the Petitioner and Rajkumar Bajaj asked her to sign and therefore the Respondent No. 2 stated that there is a possibility of above lands being fake and on that basis a First Information Report was registered against Petitioner and 4 three other accused persons for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code by the Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations made in the First Information Report do not constitute an offence and are made with an ulterior motive to wreak vengeance against the Petitioner and no ingredient of offence punishable as alleged is made out against him even if entire case of the prosecution is accepted as it is. Further, the entire dispute is clearly a civil dispute which has been given criminal colour. Therefore, he prays for quashment of the FIR, charge-sheet and and further proceedings. 5. Per Contra, learned State counsel oppose the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the offence relates to cheating. He further submits that in the case in hand, the charge-sheet has already been filed and the matter requires investigation. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 7. Prima-facie, this Court found that the petitioner has come up before this Court for quashment of FIR, charge sheet and further proceedings which was registered at the behest of the complainant/respondent No.2. From bare perusal of the pleadings 5 and the documents, it is evident that the matter relates to cheating and requires investigation. Further perusal of the pleadings and documents appended with the petition, it is apparent from the agreement to sale, that a cash transaction of Rs.45,78,000/- is stated to be made which is not at all legally permitted under law which goes to show that alleged transaction is bogus and false. It is also manifest that when the respondent No. 2 proceeded to enter into the sale transaction in respect of the subject land, the respondent No. 3 sent a notice stating therein that she has never sold the land in question for which the respondent No. 2 is going to do the sale transaction whereas respondent No. 3 put her signature on the papers provided by the petitioner and other accused. Thus, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the charge sheet has already been filled against the petitioner, who is a broker of property and it cannot be said that the impugned charge-sheet does not disclose a cognizable offence, thus, at this stage, we do not find it a fit case to interfere. 8. Accordingly, the present CRMP is dismissed, at motion stage. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti/ $ Bhilwar