1 2025:CGHC:53513-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3295 of 2025 1. Nisha Koshik W/o Devendra Koshik Aged About 33 Years Working As Opd Doctor At Mahadev Super- Specialty Hospital Bilaspur (C.G.) 2. Ajay Yadav S/o Pancham Yadav Aged About 36 Years Working As Operation Incharge At Mahadev Super-Specialty Hospital, Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through, SHO Police Station Bodla, District- Kabirdham C.G. 2. Smt. Madhu Sahu W/o Satish Sahu R/o Village Karesara Police Chowki Pondi, Police Station Bodla, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.11.03 18:03:03 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 03.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. Gagan Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Malay Jain, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No. 1/State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the First Information Report and supplementary charge-sheet submitted before the competent Court by Police of Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham in Crime No. 93 of 2019 and the subsequent criminal proceedings pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class Kabirdhan (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 1758 of 2019 with respect tot he petitioners, in the interest of justice.” 3. Upon perusal of the pleadings and the reliefs sought in the present petition, it transpires that a supplementary charge-sheet has admittedly been filed against the petitioner, and cognizance of the offences has already been taken by the learned trial Court. The petitioner has sought quashment of the FIR, the supplementary charge- 3 sheet, and the entire proceedings pending before the learned trial Court. However, in the considered opinion of this Court, the prayer so framed is defective, as the petitioner has failed to specify the offences mentioned in the supplementary charge-sheet. Such omission reflects that the prayer has been drafted in a casual and unsatisfactory manner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present petition, with liberty to file a fresh petition incorporating an appropriate and precise prayer. 5. Learned State counsel submits that he has no objection to the said request. 6. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners, the present petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for, subject to the petitioners depositing a sum of Rs.5,000/- each as costs before the Registry of this Court. The petitioners shall produce the receipt of such deposit at the time of filing the fresh petition, if any. The amount so deposited shall be transmitted to the Government Disabled College, Mana Camp, Raipur (C.G.). 7. Certified copies of the FIR, supplementary charge-sheet, and other documents, if any, be returned to the petitioners after retaining photocopies of the same for record. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan