1 2025:CGHC:50551 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 3075 of 2025 Anwar Dhebar S/o Late Hazi Zikar Dhebar Aged About 51 Years R/o Dhebar House, Pension Bada, Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Currently Under Judicial Custody At Central Jail, Raipur Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner versus 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 ---- Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Harshwardhan Parganiha, Advocate For State-Respondent : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Additional AG Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 10/10/2025 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking inter alia quashing and setting aside of the order dated 10.09.2025 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (PC Act), at Raipur, Chhattisgarh, whereby the petitioner’s application under Section 187(3) of the BNSS 2023 VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.10.10 16:37:22 +0530 2 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 Charge-sheet dated 29.06.2025 filed by the EOW/ACB Chhattisgarh ("Respondent") qua the Petitioner before the Ld. Special Judge is 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 Charge-sheets 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 Vasant