-1- 2025:CGHC:2195 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1438 of 2022 Shivkumar Bhosle S/o Kashinath Bhosle Aged About 55 Years R/o House No. 69/641 Near Sai Mandir Daganiya Police Station D.D. Nagar District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Civil Line, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Dinesh Singh Thakur S/o Duryodhan Singh Aged About 44 Years R/o Maruti Life Style, House No. 102, Police Station Saraswati Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Jhanedra Kumar Mahilang, Advocate For Res.No.1/State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni, Govt. Advocate For Respondent No.2s : Ms. Pooja Loniya, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 14/01/2025 1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking cancellation of bail granted to respondent No.2, on the ground that after obtaining bail, respondent No.2 is pressurizing, threatening and harassing the petitioner/complainant for providing land to him Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA -2- which was subject matter of complaint. Report in this regard is made to Inspector General of Police on 17.08.2022, however, no action is taken on it. 2. Learned counsel for the State submits that after receipt of complaint by the Police Station, Civil Lines, Raipur, from the office of Inspector General of Police, Raipur, an inquiry was conducted on the complaint and during inquiry, statement of complainant/petitioner was also recorded on 04.07.2023. In the statement, petitioner stated that at present there is no harassment, threat and pressure by respondent No.2 and he does not want any proceedings on complaint submitted by him. He contended that in view of statement made no action has been taken on his complainant. It is also contention of learned counsel for the State that document has been filed along with reply submitted on 19.07.2023, 3. When a question is posed to learned counsel for the petitioner with respect to statement given by the petitioner, he submits that he is not disputing the same. He also submits that after recording statement on 04.07.2023, as per his instructions, there is no further compliant made by the petitioner to any of the authority. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed along with this petition. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties as also -3- considering the statement of petitioner recorded by the police during course of inquiry on his compliant on 04.07.2023 that he does not want any action on his complaint and further that statement which is filed along with reply of the State is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any good ground to allow this petition. 6. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/---/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen