1 2025:CGHC:48448-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2923 of 2025 1 - Mohit Jaiswal S/o Narottam Jaiswal Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Beltikri, Tahsil - Bhatgaon, Police Station - Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh 2 - Moharsai Jaiswal S/o Narottam Jaiswal Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Beltikri, Tahsil - Bhatgaon, Police Station - Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Ministry Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Superintendent Of Police Sarangarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh 3 - Station House Officer Police Station - Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh- Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh 4 - Saraswati Jaiswal W/o Harishankar Jaiswal Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Beltikri, Tahsil - Bhatgaon, Police Station - Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gorelal Tandon and Mr. Shyamta Prasad Sannat, Advocates For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.09.23 10:54:38 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 22.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. Gorelal Tandon and Mr. Shyamta Prasad Sannat, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Soumya Rai, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents No.1 to 3 / State. 2. The petitioners have filed this petition with following prayer: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and further be pleased to quash the first information report bearing Crime No. 224/2025 dated 26.08.2025, registered at Police Station Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 115(2), 296, 3(5), 333 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 against the applicants, in the interest of justice.” 3. Prosecution story in a nutshell is that on 26.08.2025, the complainant lodged a complaint alleging inter alia that on the said date, at about 12:45 PM, one Mohit Jaiswal was coming towards the complainant’s house. Meanwhile, accused Moharsai, who was standing at a little distance, started hurling filthy abuses and threatened to beat and break the limbs of the complainant. Using obscene language, he further entered her residence. Thereafter, Mohit Jaiswal intruded into the complainant’s house and 3 assaulted her children, causing injuries to their hands and legs. At that time, the complainant’s husband was not at home, and consequently, she and her children were extremely frightened and traumatized by the incident. It has further been alleged that due to the lack of appropriate action against the accused persons, they continued to harass and threaten the complainant and her family with abusive language and threats to kill them. It is specifically alleged that Mohit Jaiswal entered the complainant’s house at the instigation of accused Moharsai, who was provoking him from his nearby residence. It was further alleged that if immediate legal action under appropriate provisions is not taken against the accused for their obscene behaviour and unlawful intrusion, an untoward incident may occur at any time to the complainant’s family. On the basis of this complaint, the Police of Police Station Bilaigarh registered FIR bearing Crime No. 224/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 3(5), 333 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 against the petitioners, and investigation was initiated. Hence this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the report lodged by the complainant is false, frivolous, and fabricated. The complainant and her family members are harboring a grudge against the petitioners on account of previous disputes. In particular, there is a civil dispute between the parties concerning land bearing Khasra No. 34/1 admeasuring Rakba 0.405 hectare. The said dispute had culminated in Civil Suit No. 51-A/2024 filed 4 before the Court of the learned First Civil Judge, Senior Division, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.), which came to be finally decided on 10.02.2025 in favour of the present petitioners. Further, in the year 2023, the wife of applicant No. 2, namely Smt. Durga Jaiswal, had lodged FIR bearing Crime No. 210/2023 at Police Station Bilaigarh for offences punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 147, 148, 149, and 427 of the Indian Penal Code against the complainant Saraswati Jaiswal, her husband Harishankar Jaiswal, and their family members. On account of the said criminal proceedings, the complainant and her family have developed animosity and enmity against the present petitioners, and as a counter-blast, the present false complaint has been lodged. Further, the wife of petitioner No. 2 has also made several complaints and representations before the Superintendent of Police and other higher authorities highlighting the false and fabricated nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners in the present case. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that once the FIR has been registered, it has to be investigated and taken to its logical end. Thus, at this stage, no interference is warranted. He would rely upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jeelani reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, wherein the Supreme Court has observed that inherent power in a matter of 5 quashment of FIR has to be exercised sparingly and with caution and when and only when such exercise is justified by the test specifically laid down in the provision itself. He would further rely upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 315, wherein the Supreme Court has laid down that when a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the alleged accused and the court when it exercises the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether the allegations in the FIR disclose commission of a cognizable offence or not. The court is not required to consider on merits whether or not the merits of the allegations made out a cognizable offence and the court has to permit the investigating agency/police to investigate the allegations in the FIR. Therefore, in the light of the above mentioned judgments, the instant petition is absolutely misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. 6. Learned State Counsel also submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR, it is evident that the complainant, Smt. Saraswati Jaiswal, has alleged that on 26.08.2025 at about 12:45 PM, accused Mohit Jaiswal, son of Navratna Jaiswal, unlawfully entered her residence, hurled obscene and abusive language, and thereafter assaulted her children, causing injuries to their hands and legs. It is further alleged that at the relevant time, accused Moharsai Jaiswal, was standing nearby and was instigating Mohit Jaiswal 6 by exhorting him to beat and break the limbs of the complainant’s family members. The complainant has further alleged that her husband was not at home during the incident, and due to the assault and continuous threats, she and her children were left in a state of fear and trauma. It has also been stated that despite such grave conduct, no effective action was taken, and the accused persons continue to hurl abuses and extend threats to kill the complainant’s family. The FIR also discloses that the accused persons were witnessed by villagers while committing the alleged acts. Thus, prima facie, the allegations contained in the FIR disclose commission of offences relating to criminal trespass, use of obscene language, assault causing injuries, and criminal intimidation, which necessitate investigation under the relevant provisions of law. 7. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the prayers and pleadings made in this petition. 8. The Supreme Court in the matter of Neharika Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 315 has observed that the power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection in the rarest of rare cases. While examining an F.I.R./complaint, quashing of which is sought, the Court cannot inquire about the reliability, genuineness, or otherwise of the allegations made in the F.I.R./complaint. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Now 7 Section 528 of the BNSS) is very wide, but conferment of wide power requires the Court to be cautious. The Supreme Court has emphasized that though the Court has the power to quash the F.I.R. in suitable cases, the Court, when it exercises power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Now Section 528 of the BNSS), only has to consider whether or not the allegations of F.I.R. disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and is not required to consider the case on merit. 9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court finds that from a bare perusal of the FIR, specific and direct allegations have been made against the petitioners regarding criminal trespass into the complainant’s house, use of obscene and abusive language, assault causing injuries to the complainant’s children, and criminal intimidation at the instigation of co-accused. The FIR thus discloses commission of cognizable offences warranting investigation under the relevant provisions of law. At this stage, the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations cannot be examined by this Court, as the same falls within the domain of investigation. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction for quashing of the FIR. 10. Resultantly, the petition being devoid of merits stands dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet