1 2025:CGHC:31239-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 438 of 2024 1 - Om Shankar Sahu S/o Gunjari Lal Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Gumiya P.S. Hardibajar Teh Barpali District Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Superintendent Of Police Distt. Korba, Sp Office, Korba District Korba (C.G.) 3 - Station House Officer P.S.Hardibazar District Korba (C.G.) 4 - Jyoti Sahu D/o Firatram Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Bajar Dafayi Surakchhar P.S. Kusmunda, Teh Katghora, Distt. Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Anil Tripathi, Advocate. For Respondents No 1 to 3/State : Shri S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate. For Respondent No. 4 : Shri Amit Kumar, Advocate SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.07.09 18:06:10 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 08/07/2025 1. Heard Shri Anil Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Shri S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State/Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Shri Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4. 2. The present petition has been filed for seeking following reliefs:- “1. Hon’ble Court may be kind and gracious enough to call for the records of the case from the respondents. 2. Hon’ble Court may be kind be pleased to quash the FIR No. 0172/2024 dated 24.06.2024 registered in the Police Station Hardibajar Distt- Korba (C.G.) and issue writ of mandamus or any other writ/writs, order/orders or direction/directions. 3. Any other relief/reliefs which Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.” 3. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking quashment of the F.I.R. dated 24.06.2024 under Crime No. 0172/2024, registered against the petitioner in Police Station Hardi Bazar, Korba District Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 509-B of the Indian Penal Code 1860. 3 4. Facts of the case in short is that marriage of the petitioner with the complainant/respondent No.4 herein was solemnized on 17.02.2017 with the consent of family as per Hindu rites and rituals. After keeping her well for a few days, the accused and his family members started harassing the complainant/respondent no. 4. One day the petitioner/husband asked the complainant/respondent wife to give him divorce. On being asked respondent wife refused, then petitioner sent a video of the respondent wife containing obscene photo of her to her brother and insulted her by showing the obscene photos to other people. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the FIR lodged by the respondent no. 4 is devoid of any base and merit, it is an afterthought and counterblast to the applications before the concerning Judicial authorities. He further submit that the FIR has been lodged after an unexplained delay of 44 days and the allegations made by respondent no. 4 against the petitioner do not hold any validity because she and her first husband have already shared their photos on social media platform. He submits that respondent No. 4 is trying to victimize herself as now petitioner knows her reality that she is already married to one Dharmesh and hiding the reality she married the petitioner fraudulently and this conduct has been reported by the petitioner to JMFC Korba and the matter is pending for investigation, so in order to counter the same and to gain sympathy she is using poor tactic to lodge 4 fake FIR against the petitioner. He further prays for quashing the FIR registered against the petitioner. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 opposed the argument made and submit that registration of FIR is just and proper as cognizable offence is made out. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 8. It is settled propositions that the Court in ordinary course should not invoke its powers to quash such proceedings except in rare and compelling circumstances. It is also well settled propositions that quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C is permissible only if the complaint does not disclose any offence or the same is frivolous, vexatious or oppressive, which in the present case does not come out. 9. On perusal of the pleadings, it is apparently appears that the petitioner has sent the obscene video of the complainant/respondent no. 4 herein who is his own wife to his brother in law as well as to others with an intention to tarnish the image of the complainant. Therefore in the considered opinion of this court we do not find any good ground to entertain this petition seeking quashment of FIR. 5 10. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Shoaib/Rahul