1 2025:CGHC:54805-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 573 of 2025 1 - Smt. Renu Gupta W/o Shri Rahul Kumar Gupta, D/o Shri Palu Ram Gupta Aged About 27 Years R/o Mo. Sundarnagar (Near Electricity Office), Sitapur, Police Station And Tahsil Sitapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh (Wife) 2 - Palu Ram Gupta S/o Shri Rameshwar Prasad Gupta Aged About 68 Years Occupation - Service (Retired), Principal, Government Higher Secondary School - Rajapur, Block - Mainpat, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh R/o Mo. Sundarnagar (Near Electricity Office), Sitapur, Police Station And Tahsil Sitapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh (Father Of Pet. No. 1) ... Petitioners versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director General Of Police Department Of Home Affairs, Police Head Quarter, Sector-19, Nawa Raipur, Baijnathpara, Near Atal Nagar Distt Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent Of Police Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh 4 - The Superintendent Of Police Ambikapur District Sarguja Chhattisgarh 5 - The Station House Officer P.S. - Frazerpur (Parpa), Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh 6 - Rahul Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Satish Chandra Gupta Aged About 32 Years R/o Jhalmala, Purani Basti, Police Station And Tahsil - Balod, Distt Balod Chhattisgarh Presently Occupation - Government Service, Working And Posted As Naib Tahsildar, Tahsil Frezerpur And In-Charge Tahsildar, Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh (Husband Of Petitioner No. 01) --- Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Advocate with Mr. Vivek Bhakta, Advocate. For Respondents-State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy.G.A. AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.11.12 18:25:33 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 11 .11 .2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the case from the authorities concerned for its kind perusal. 10.2 That the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside /quash the impugned notice dated 14.10.2025 (ANNEXURE P-1), issued U/s. 179 of BNSS, 2023 by the Resp. No.05, whereby the Petitioner(s) were directed to appear before the Police Station Frazerpur (Parpa), Jagdalpur District Bastar (C.G.) on 15.11.2025 at 11.00 am for recording their statements, in pursuance to the complaint filed U/s. 223 of BNSS, 2023, by the Respondent No.06 (Rahul Kumar Gupta) in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bastar (Jagdalpur) for the offence U/s. 296, 351(2), 318, 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, as mentioned in the impugned notice, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent No.05 (i.e. SHO, PS Frazerpur) 3 to record the statements of the Petitioners at their residence i.e. Sitapur, District Sarguja (C.G.), in the interest of justice 10.4 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble High Court deems fit and proper be also awarded.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner No.1 is the wife of respondent No.6 and petitioner No.2 is the father of petitioner No.1. Learned counsel submits that the respondent No.6 has filed a complaint before the J.M.F.C., Bastar, Jagdalpur for the offence under Section 296, 351(2), 318, 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. Pursuant to that complaint, a notice has been issued to the petitioners under Section 179 of BNSS, 2023 and the petitioners were directed to appear before the P.S. Frazerpur (Parpa), Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. on 15/11/2025 for recording their statements. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner No.1 is a woman, whereas the petitioner No.2 is aged about 68 years, which is contrary to the provision of Section 179 of BNSS 2023. He submits that just to harass the petitioners, the impugned notice has been issued to them for recording their statements at P.S. Prazerpur (Parpa), Jagdalpur which is about 600 km away from the resident of petitioners i.e. Sitapur, District Sarguja. He further submits that the impugned notice is also bad in law, as the concerned police station did not supply the copy of the complaint. Hence, the petition filed by the petitioners may be allowed. 3. Per contra, learned State Counsel would submit that the notice 4 issued to the petitioners under Section 179 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is in due compliance with the procedure prescribed under law as upon receiving the complaint filed by respondent No.6 before the learned J.M.F.C., Bastar, Jagdalpur, for the aforesaid offence, the concerned police authorities have merely issued a notice to the petitioners for the purpose of preliminary inquiry and recording of statements, which is part of the statutory process. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and perused the records with utmost circumspection. 5. For the sake of convenience, it would be appropriate to quote Section 179 of BNSS, 2023, which reads thus :179. Police officer's power to require attendance of witnesses: (1) Any police officer making an investigation under this Chapter may, by order in writing, require the attendance before himself of any person being within the limits of his own or any adjoining station who, from the information given or otherwise, appears to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case; and such person shall attend as so required: Provided that no male person under the age of fifteen years or above the age of sixty years or a woman or a mentally or physically disabled person or a person with 5 acute illness shall be required to attend at any place other than the place in which such person resides: Provided further that if such person is willing to attend at the police station, such person may be permitted so to do. (2) The State Government may, by rules made in this behalf, provide for the payment by the police officer of the reasonable expenses of every person, attending under sub- section (1) at any place other than his residence. 6. In view of the proviso to Section 179 of the BNSS, it is noteworthy that the petitioner No.1 is a woman, and petitioner No.2 is aged about 68 years, which is above the age of 60 years, in such circumstances, they cannot be summoned to the police station for the purpose of recording their statements. Consequently, the impugned notice dated 14/10/2025 is liable to be and is hereby quashed. However, the Investigating Officer who issued the said notice shall be at liberty to record the statements of the petitioners through video conferencing, in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of. SD/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Amardeep