1 2025:CGHC:52878-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3254 of 2025 1 - Smt. Sippi Agrawal W/o Sushil Agrawal Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Naya Baradwar, Ward No. 6, Police Station Naya Baradwar, District- Sakti, C.G. 2 - Sushil Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Shri Hetram Agrawal Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Naya Baradwar, Police Station Naya Baradwar, District Sakti, C.G. 3 - Vinay Agrawal S/o Vijay Kumar Agrawal Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Naya Baradwar, Police Station Naya Baradwar, District Sakti, C.G. 4 - Umang Agrawal S/o Vikas Kumar Agrawal Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Naya Baradwar, Police Station Naya Baradwar, District Sakti, C.G. 5 - Satish Agrawal S/o Late Shri Hetram Agrawal Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Naya Baradwar, Police Station Naya Baradwar, District Sakti, C.G. 6 - Shantanu Agrawal S/o Satish Agrawal Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Naya Baradwar, Police Station Naya Baradwar, District Sakti, C.G. 7 - Vikas Kumar Agrawal S/o Vijay Kumar Agrawal Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Naya Baradwar, Police Station Naya Baradwar, District Sakti, C.G. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station, Baradwar, District- Sakti, C.G. ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 2 - Basant Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Shri Hetram Agrawal Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Naya Baradwar, Police Station Naya Baradwar, District Sakti, C.G. 3 - Shubh Agrawal S/o Basant Kumar Agrawal Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Naya Baradwar, Police Station Naya Baradwar, District Sakti, C.G. ... Respondents ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent No.1 /State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 & 3 : Mr. Akhand Pratap Pandey, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 30.10.2025 1 Heard Mr. Akash Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Hariom Rai, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondent No. 1 and Mr. Akhand Pratap Pandey, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos. 2 & 3. 2 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with following prayers : “1. quash and set aside the F.I.R. bearing Crime No. 139/2025 dated 04.06.2025, registered at Police Station Baradwar, District Sakti (C.G.) for the alleged offences punishable under sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 191(2), and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023 on the basis of of compromise, in the end of justice. 3 2. Take on record the written Settlement Deed and the compromise entered into between the Petitioner and the complainant, acknowledging that the dispute has been amicably and voluntarily resolved without coercion or undue influence. 3. Pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 3 Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the complainant and injured are the close relatives of the petitioners and the impugned FIR was initially lodged under Sections 115(2), 192(2), 296 and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’) on 04.06.2025 and the petitioners were already granted anticipatory bail by this Court, copies of the orders are filed herewith collectively as Annexure-P/4 and during the course of investigation, offence under Section 109 of the BNS was added. It is submitted that though the injuries sustained by the injured was grievous in nature, but not dangerous to life and as there was a trivial dispute between the parties, they have already entered into a compromise, a copy of the compromise deed is filed as Annexure-P/5 and the complainant as well as injured have also filed two separate affidavits stating that they compromised the dispute with the petitioners, hence, the impugned FIR be quashed. 4 Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 does not dispute the said fact. 5 Considering the fact that the matter is still under investigation, we 4 deem it proper that the petitioners as well as complainant and injured would appear before the Investigating Officer, who shall verify the compromise entered into between the parties and submit a police report within a period of three weeks from production of certified copy of this order. 6 Accordingly, the petitioners as well as complainant and injured are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within a period of one week from today along with certified copy of this order and compromise deed entered into between them and the Investigating Officer shall verify the compromise entered into between the parties and submit a police report within a period of two weeks thereafter. 7 In view of the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra