1 2025:CGHC:48895-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2981 of 2025 Sukhvinder Singh Bhatia S/o Shri Harjeet Singh Bhatia, aged about 43 Years Occupation - Farmer, R/o House No. 288, Ward No. 30, Ganj Line, Lakholi, Tehsil and District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, P.S.- Bagnadi, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 2 - Shri Uderam Patel, S/o. Kalaram Patel, Aged About 64 Years R/o Ward No. 21, Shivaji Ward, Dongargarh, Tahsil Dongargarh, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Aditya Khare, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 24 / 09 / 202 5 1. Heard Mr. M.P.S. Bhatia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent No.1 and Mr. Aditya Khare, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.2. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) with the following prayers :- ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 “It is, therefore, most respectfully and humbly prayed that the Hon'ble High Court may most kindly be pleased to allow the petition and may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 30.05.2016 relating to Crime No. 19/2016 registered at P.S. Bagnadi, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) against the applicant herein for offences u/S. 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC and the consequences (if any), in the interest of justice.” 3. The petitioner appears to had approached this Court for quashing of the proceedings and charge-sheet when his anticipatory bail application i.e. MCRCA No. 1198/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 06.08.2025 and from perusal of the order passed in anticipatory bail application, it transpires that charge-sheet was submitted the petitioner as an absconder, whereas the co- accused persons, against whom charge-sheet was submitted, they were acquitted by the trial Court as the trial of the petitioner was separate from the said co-accused person and now the petitioner has come up before this Court for quashing of the FIR and consequential proceedings on the ground that he has compromised the dispute with the complainant / respondent No.2. But, from perusal of the impugned FIR and the charge-sheet, it goes to show that except the offence under Section 420 of IPC, there appears to be offence under Sections 467, 468, 471 of IPC, which are non-compoundable and there is an allegation of forging of the power of attorney of the complainant, further the conduct of the petitioner goes to show that he is trying to misuse the process of law and frustrate its machinery for his oblique motive and 3 convenience, as such, we do not find any good ground for interference in the present matter. 4. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra