1 2025:CGHC:5191-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 55 of 2025 Somnath Markande S/o Sumran Markande Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Dapka, P.S. And Tehsil Khairagarh, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Superintendent of Police Khairagarh, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh. 3. Station House OfÏcer Police Station Khairagarh, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh. 4. Santosh Markande S/o Ram Gopal Markande Aged About 42 Years R/o Khairagarh, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.01.29 17:35:19 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 29.01.2025 1. Heard Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner through vide conferencing. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for respondents No. 1 to 3/State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the First Information Report bearing No. 0272 of 2024 registered at Police Station Khairagarh, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai (C.G.). 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the charge-sheet No. 211 of 2024 dated 26.07.2024 field against the petitioner under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS in Crime No. 272 of 2024. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash impugned order dated 27.08.2024 whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) has taken cognizance of the impugned charge-sheet 3 and registered criminal proceedings as Criminal Case No. 1357 of 2024 against the petitioner. 10.4 That, this Honb’le Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent Police authority to bring on record entire record of investigation made by Superintendent of Police Khairagarh and verify the afÏdavits given along with the representation (Annexure P/2). 10.5 That, any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, is a farmer residing in village Tapka and actively prepares for government job examinations. There is a land dispute arose in the petitioner’s village, and on 08.07.2024, the petitioner along with his father and mother was allegedly involved in an incident of assault and verbal abuse. She also submits that the petitioner was not present at the location at the time of the incident; he was working in the fields of farmer Chandrabhan Markande from 10.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. this is supported by afÏdavits from his co-farmers. 4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the FIR was registered two days after the alleged incident, raising questions about its credibility and the petitioner is now facing criminal proceedings in Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khairagarh, in Criminal Case No. 1357 of 2024. She would submit that the petitioner has consistently sought to clear his name by submitting representations to Senior Police OfÏcials and the Human Rights Commission, but no action 4 has been taken to correct the FIR. The first application was filed on 13.07.2024 to Superintendent of Police with afÏdavit of the person with whom he was working, then again complaint was filed to Inspector General of Police and Chhattisgarh Human Rights Commission on 15.07.2024. She further stated that the petitioner, who is a job aspirant, is facing targeted harassment due to enmity arising from the land dispute. This false implication in a criminal case is affecting his employment opportunities and right to livelihood. Hence, this petition. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the prayers and pleadings made in the writ petition along with the annexures annexed in this case. 7. On a pointed query being made by the learned counsel for the petitioner whether the said afÏdavit of the co-farmers is a part of the charge-sheet or their statements have been recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. (now Section 180 of BNSS) by the Police, to which learned counsel for the petitioner states that their statements have not been recorded and only on the basis of the afÏdavit which have been filed in the present petition, the petitioner has come up before this Court for quashing of the FIR as well as charge-sheet. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the injured, who has suffered injuries on his person has also stated in his statement before the Police that the petitioner along with his parents assaulted him and he received injuries though the injuries were 5 simple in nature, we are not inclined to quash the FIR bearing Crime No.0272 of 2024 as well as charge-sheet No. 211 of 2024 dated 26.07.2024 filed against the present petitioner. 9. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan