1 2025:CGHC:34756-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2277 of 2025 Deepanshu Raj S/o Raj Narayan Prasad Aged About 37 Years Proprietor M/s Ashirwad Construction R/o North Ring Road, Near Pani Tanki, Gandhinagar Ambikapur District Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O Police Station Gandhinagar Dehat Ambikapur District Surguja (C.G.) 2 Rohit Singh S/o Yogendra Nath Singh Aged About 38 Years R/o Near Chandu Garage Ward No. 5 Godhanpur Ambikapur District Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nishi Kant Sinha, Advocate For Respondent /State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 22/07/2025 1. Heard Mr. Nishi Kant Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.07.23 10:31:21 +0530 2 also Mr. Nitansh Jaiwal, P.L. for the State. 2. The instant CRMP has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned F.I.R registered against the petitioner bearing Crime No. 385/2025 dated 08.07.2025, under section 120 B, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code at Police station Gandhinagar Dehat Ambikapur District Surguja (C.G), in the larger interest of justice.” 3. (a) Facts of the case in brief is that, an FIR has been lodged by the respondent No.2 against the petitioner and 9 other co-accused persons alleging that a Tender was issued on 29.07.2019 which was given to the petitioner herein for agreed work contract of amount of Rs. 16.75 Lakh. The Said tender was for construction of Boundary Wall of Kutkut Farm sized 450 Meter in length. It is alleged that the petitioner in connivance with government officials/ co-accused persons have misappropriated the government fund by using low quality product specially by using 10 mm iron instead of 12 mm in the plinth column and increased the estimate by amending the work contract by addition of Coil Wire to the tune of Rs. 60,000/- to 7,17,000/-. (b) The respondent no.2 /complainant has alleged the 3 misappropriation of fund and made several complaints to the concerned authorities and in turn an enquiry was conducted and misappropriation of fund to the tune of Rs.3643 was found. Being unsatisfied the complainant approached the higher authorities and re-enquiry was conducted and quality of work was not found according to the work contract and payment of Rs. 5,20,617/- was found to be given to the contractor in excess. Hence it has been alleged that the officers and Contractor i.e the petitioner were involved in low quality work and misappropriation of fund. (c) On the application filed under 156 (3) of Cr.P.C by respondent no. 2, the learned C.J.M Ambikapur District Surguja (CG) vide its order dated 28.03.2025 has directed the registration of F.I.R to the concerned Police Station. Thereafter, the FIR has been registered before the Police Station, Gandhinagar Dehat Ambikapur District Surguja against the present petitioner and others bearing Crime NO. 385/2025 dated 08.07.2025 under Section 120B, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant/ respondent No. 2 and the present petitioner used to work together and the complainant has lodged false case against the petitioner just to blackmail the petitioner and extract money from him. He further submits that he has completed the work as per the contract and the guidelines and has not misappropriated government fund in any way. Therefore, he prays for quashment of the FIR. 4 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 and misappropriation of funds 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, which was registered at the behest of respondent No. 2. From bare perusal of the pleadings and the documents, it is evident that the matter relates to using low quality material and misappropriation of government funds. There is a specific allegation that the petitioner done the work with inferior quality of material and while doing such act the Government officials rendered their help to the petitioner and in this way they caused misappropriation of whopping public exchequer. Thus, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case it cannot be said that the impugned FIR 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