1 2025:CGHC:8017 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1907 of 2018 Smt. Saraswati Devi Gupta W/o Late Mitthan Lal Gupta Aged About 69 Years R/o 1, Kailas Colony Road No. 2, Near Bhagat Singh Chuaraha Alwar, Thana City Kotwali, Alwar, District - Alwar, Rajasthan. Through - Power Of Attorney Holder Tribhuwan Gupta, Aged About 52 Years, S/o Late Mitthan Lal Gupta, R/o 39 - Chetan Enclave, Face - 2 Jaipur Road Alwar, District Alwar, Rajasthan. ... Petitioner versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Mandir Hasaud, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 14.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. Abhishek Chandravanshi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the private respondents. 2. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 482 of CrPC for being aggrieved by the delay caused in conclusion of trial of Criminal Case No. 37/2012 (State vs. Nirmal Mahavar and Ors.) also on 26.08.2013 the prosecution submitted a supplementary challan by adding the Ranjana Mahavar a fresh RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 criminal case registered as Criminal Case No. 518/13 (State vs. Ranjana Mahawar), prays for a direction of early disposal of the case. 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that the petitioner is the owner of lands pertaining to the petitioner vide total khasra No. 30, Total area 10.322 Hectares(26.48 Acres), situated at village Tulsi, Tahsil and District Raipur (C.G.). On 14.12.1994 the petitioner executed a general power of attorney (for short GPA) in favour of her younger brother Nirmal Mahavar S/o Late Umraolal Mahavar for maintenance and upkeep of agricultural land. The petitioner did not intend to transfer any land through such GPA. The aforesaid younger brother of the petitioner taking advantage of the trust bestowed upon him by the petitioner misappropriated the funds by giving false accounts and less money to the petitioner. In the year 2006 the State Government acquired 5.82 Acres of land and issued compensation of Rs. 18,03,395/- in favour of the petitioner. The aforesaid GPA holder brother of the petitioner in connivance with his brother-in-law, Shivaditya Shukla received the aforesaid amount and misappropriated the same by causing wrongful loss to the petitioner and receiving wrongful gains for himself. Upon receiving information regarding such misappropriation the petitioner immediately cancelled the aforesaid GPA issued and got published a public notice in daily newspapers of wide circulation on 03.07.2010. In reply to the aforesaid public notice the aforesaid brother, Nirmal Mahavar, stated that he has already 3 sold the lands of the petitioner to his wife Ranjana Mahavar on 19.12.1994 for Rs. 2,70,000/-. Thus, both husband and wife cheated the petitioner and got the valuable lands of the petitioner transferred in their name. After the cancellation of the GPA the aforesaid brother, Nirmal Mahavar, got the sale-deed registered on 30.06.2010 in connivance with the Sub-registrar S.K. Garhewal by paying the deficit stamp duty. The petitioner upon knowledge of such cheating and misappropriation made a complaint to the Police Station Mandirhasaud, Raipur with regard to the aforesaid incident on 28.07.2010 and 03.08.2010. The Police registered a crime No. 229/10 against the aforesaid Nirmal Mahavar and Shivaditya Shukla. Thereafter the Police has investigated the crime and after much delay the Police has filed challan on 29.01.2012 only against Nirmal Mahavar and Shivaditya Shukla. No notice for not filing any challan against the wife Ranjana Mahavar was given to the applicant which is mandatory under Section 169 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, the learned trial Court registered a criminal case No. 37/2012 against the aforesaid two accused persons and framed charges under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the IPC on 15.03.2012. Since then there has been no progress in the trial and the learned trial Court in clear violation of Section 309 of CrPC is adjourning the case on one pretext or another. The prosecution has been loathe in conducting the prosecution in the instant case and no proper steps have been taken by the 4 prosecution and/or the trial Court to ensure that the prosecution witnesses are being presented in the Court for recording of evidence. Due to the aforesaid delay the petitioner is suffering miscarriage of justice. On 26.08.2013 the prosecution submitted a supplementary challan by adding the aforesaid Ranjana Mahavar (wife of Nirmal Mahavar and beneficiary of sale deed dated 19.12.1994) before the learned trial Court. The learned trial court instead of adding the aforesaid Ranjana Mahavar in the array of accused in the criminal case No. 37/2012 registered a fresh criminal case vide Criminal Case No. 518/13. However, the learned trial court ordered for analogous hearing of the two cases. Till date no charges have been framed in the aforesaid criminal case No. 518/13. Thus, justice is hopelessly delayed in the case of the petitioner. On 21.05.2014 the petitioner was constrained to move an application for assisting the prosecution in both the cases which was allowed by the learned trial court but still no progress in trial has been shown. Thus, the petitioner has no alternative left but to approach this Court under Section 482 CrPC read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of proper directions to the learned trial Court for an expeditious trial lest the witnesses be won over by the accused persons. Hence, this petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the trial court is violating Section 309 CrPC. It is submitted that the learned trial Court and has failed to complete the trial within the 5 prescribed time limit. It is further contended that the prosecution has not taken any proper steps to bring the witnesses to trial and hence undue delay has been caused in the instant case. It is also contended that speedy trial is the soul of criminal trial and the prosecution is making a mockery of criminal justice dispensation system. This Court under its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC read with general power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India can direct the trial Court for early disposal of the trial. It is further submitted that the trial Court has not issued warrants to the witnesses for not coming to the Court. It is further submitted that even after the direction of this Court the trial is still pending before the learned trial Court for framing of charge. It is further submitted that the accused had filed CRMP No. 1275/2019 and the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.06.2024 dismissed the said petition and further directed to expedite the trial within a period of six months but the same has still not been concluded, and the present petition has been filed by the petitioner for expediting the said trial. 5. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that after filing of the charge-sheet the charges have already been framed against the accused persons and at present the trial is in progress, statement of the complainant has already been recorded, further the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature, therefore, the instant petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be 6 dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that the accused had filed CRMP No. 1275/2019 and the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.06.2024 dismissed the said petition and further directed to expedite the trial within a period of six months but the same has still not been concluded, and the present petition has been filed by the petitioner for expediting the said trial, and as there is already an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the petitioner of the accused being CRMP No. 1275/2019, hence, I do not find any good ground showing the importance of the present petition for giving a direction again for the same cause. 8. Accordingly, the instant petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merits, liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 9. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar