1 2025:CGHC:4014 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2887 of 2024 1 - Sabbir Hussain S/o Abdul Rehman Aged About 68 Years Sakin Khaparganj, Madarsa Irfaniya Ke Baju, Thana City Kotwali, Bilaspur Tehsil Evam Zila Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Dwara Thana Prabhari, City Kotwali, Bilaspur Tehsil Evam Zila Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - Maulana Mohammad Salim S/o Zahur Khan Aged About 45 Years Sakin Ahad Kitab Ghar, Taiyyaba Chowk, Talapara, Thana Civil Line, Bilaspur Tehsil Evam Zila Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Rubina Khan W/o Maulana Mohammad Salim Aged About 40 Years Ahad Kitab Ghar Taiyyaba Chowk, Talapara, Thana Civil Line, Tehsil Evam Zila Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Arbaz S/o Imran Urf Ubbu Aged About 25 Years Sakin Khaparganj, Thana City Kotwali, Bilaspur Tehsil Evam Zila Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 5 - Afzal Aged About 25 Years Sakin Anas Beg House Kuber Stationary Dukan Ke Samne, Khaparganj, Thana City Kotwali, Bilaspur Tehsil Evam Zila Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 6 - Chhotu Aged About 25 Years Sakin Chhotu Motor Cycle Dukan Kuber Stationary Dukan Ke Samne, Khaparganj, Thana City Kotwali, Tehsil Evam Zila Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : In person. For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Keshav Gupta, Dy. Govt. Adv. (Hon’ble Mr. Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J) Order on Board 22/01/2025 1. This CRMP has been preferred by the petitioner under Sections 528, 379(a) and Section 215(B) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2025.01.24 18:17:36 +0530 2 seeking following reliefs :- (1) अतः माननीय न्यायालय से ्ቚा्ቕना है कि उपरो्ሹ ारणों े परिर्ቚेቌኚय में अनावेदगणों ने जानबूझ र अपने किये गये अपराध से अपना बचाव रने माननीय उ्ሴ न्यायालय ें पारिरत आदेश किदनां 18.04.2024 ी ं डि.ा 4 में झूठे बेबुकिनयाद अभि2्ቕन र आवेद ी याडिचा किदनां 18.04.2024 ो किनरस्त राये जाने े ारण आवेदन किदनां 18-4-2024 में सुधार रते हुए धारा 340 () न्यू धारा 379(), बी.एन. एस.एस. े ्ቚावधानों े तहत् अनावेदगणों े किवरु्ቍ अंतगत धारा 318(4), 318(3), 229, 233, 236, 237, 242, 61 (1) बी.एन. .ी.एस. े तहत् दቄኌ9.त ायवाही किये जाने किसी स्ቌम पीठासीन अडिधारी ो किनयु्ሹ किया जार दቄኌ9.त ायवाही ी जावे । आवेद ी याडिचा स्वीार किये जाने ी दया रें । 2) इसे सा्ቕ ही माननीय न्यायालय से ्ቚा्ቕना है कि उपरो्ሹ ारणों े परिर्ቚेቌኚय में अनावेदगणों े ्ቛारा अपने किये गये गं2ीर अपराध से अपना बचाव रने माननीय न्यायालय े सम्ቌ न्यायालय ो धोखा देने े उ्ቌेश्य से झूठा बेबुकिनयाद ्ቕन रते हुए आवेद ी पीकिAशन याडिचा सी.आर.एम.पी. नम्बर 565/2023 शब्बीर हुसैन बनाम छ्ቈीसगढ़ शासन + 5 आदेश किदनां 18.04.2024 ो किनरस्त राया गया है। उस पर अनावेदगणों े किवरू्ቍ अंतगत धारा 316 (1), 324(4), 333, 331(4), 309(6), 351(2), 61 (1) बी.एन. .ी. एस. े तहत् अपराध पंजीब्ቍ र ्ቕाना ्ቚ2ारी सिसAी ोतवाली किबलासपुर ो जॉच ा किनदJश किदया जाना न्याय ्ቚशासन े किहतों ी सुर्ቌा े लिलए न्याय उडिचत है । ्ቚा्ቕना न्यायकिहत में न्याय ्ቚशासन े किहतों ी सुर्ቌा े लिलए स्वीार किये जाने ी दया रें । 2. Petitioner in person would submit that, earlier he had filed Cr.M.P. No. 565/2023, which has been disposed of by this Court vide order dated 18-4- 2024 by a biparte order. He further submitted that, in aforesaid petition, respondents No. 2, 3 and 5 had made false averment and on the basis of that false averment, said petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. Therefore, he prayed that petition may be admitted for hearing. 3. In reply, learned counsel for the State would submit that, the manner in 3 which the petitioner has drafted and filed the petition is itself vague. If petitioner is aggrieved with the order, then he may challenge the order dated 18-4-2024 passed by this Court, but he has not taken any such recourse nor has specifically pleaded nor filed any document to demonstrate the fact that, respondents No. 2, 3 and 5 of that petition, had made what false statement. Therefore, this petition is liable to be rejected. 4. Heard the petitioner and learned Dy. Govt. Adv. appearing for the respondent No. 1 and perused the material available on record. 5. Perusal of petition shows that, there is property dispute between the parties and other litigations are also pending. 6. Cr.M.P. No. 565/2023 was filed by the petitioner for indulgence of this Court in respect of order dated 1-2-2023 passed by 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur (CG) in Cr.Revision No. 3/2023, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. was rejected. 7. In instant petition, petitioner has sought relief that aforesaid order has been obtained by respondents by making false statement, therefore appropriate action be taken against them and police may also be directed to lodge FIR against them, but petitioner has not specifically pleaded that what false statement has been made by them. He has also not filed documents to demonstrate these facts. If the petitioner has any grievance in respect of possession of disputed property, then he may take recourse to law, available to him. The manner in which, instant petition has been drafted and filed, this Court is not inclined to entertain instant petition. Hence, this petition is dismissed at motion stage. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) JUDGE pathak