1 2025:CGHC:47396 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2895 of 2025 1 - Kawasi Lakhma S/o Late Shri Hadma Kawasi Aged About 66 Years R/o 134, Officers Colony Dharampura, Raipur Chhattisgarh (Currently Under Judicial Custody At Central Jail, Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Investigating Officer, Economic Offence Wing./ Anti -Corruption Bureau Chhattisgarh Head Quarter At Telibandha In Front Of Jai Jawan Petrol Pump Raipur Chhattisgarh - 492001 ---Non-applicants For applicants : Mr. Harshwardhan Parganiha, Advocate For-Non-applicants : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Addl. A.G. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 16/09/2025 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner inter alia seeking quashing and setting aside of the Order dated 18.08.2025 passed by Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.09.18 17:43:21 +0530 2 the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (PC Act), at Raipur, Chhattisgarh whereby the petitioner’s application under Section 187(3) of the BNSS 2023 seeking release on default bail in connection with FIR No. 04/2024 dated 17.01.2024 has been dismissed. 2. The principal contention of the Petitioner is that the 3rd Supplementary Chargesheet dated 27.06.2025 filed by the EOW/ACB Chhattisgarh ("Respondent") qua the Petitioner before the Ld. Special Judgeis incomplete and has been filed in piecemeal manner only to scuttle the Petitioner's statutory right of default bail. Further, the Respondent Agency has adopted a uniform practice of filing piecemeal Chargesheets without completing investigation and thereafter continuing to undertake "further investigation" indefinitely, accompanied by coercive measures, including arrests. Such actions have been taken without obtaining permission from the competent jurisdictional court and in a manner calculated to prejudice the rights of the Petitioner. The continuation of investigation endlessly in the present case is violative of procedure established by law. Hence, this Petition. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent -EOW vehemently opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for petitioner and submits that as far as petitioner is concerned, investigation has been completed and a complete charge-sheet has been filed before the Special Court, therefore the present CRMP is not maintainable. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 3 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the respondent-authorities has already filed the complete charge-sheet against the petitioner within 90 days from the date of first remand, therefore this petition is not maintainable and there is no ground made by the petitioner for exercising the extraordinary power of this Court under Section 528 of BNSS. 6. Accordingly, the present CRMP stands dismissed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti