1 2025:CGHC:56228-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3489 of 2025 Chandrakant Sharma Alias Tillu Sharma S/o Late Ashwini Kumar Sharma Aged About 59 Years R/o Near Ansh Hotel, Dhimrapur Road, Police Station - Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. The State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer of Police Station - Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 2. Dhanvijay Singh S/o Late Vinod Singh Aged About 41 Years R/o Atal Vihar Colony, Kotra Road, Raigarh Police Station Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 19.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. Amit Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondent No. 1. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.11.19 18:53:44 +0530 2 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “1. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside/quash FIR dated 03.11.2025 in (FIR) Crime No. 0570 of 2025 under Section 196 and 299 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered in PS- Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigharh, C.G. (Annexure P/1) against the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 2. That any other relief Hon’ble Court deems fit may also be granted.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 2, namely Dhanvijay Singh, lodged a First Information Report (FIR) against the petitioner on 03.11.2025. The complainant, President of Mahadev Chhatt Ghaat Samiti, Kharraghat, Raigarh, alleges that on 30.10.2025, the petitioner posted content on social media that attacked religious beliefs. The post is claimed to be derogatory toward Chhath Puja. The petitioner is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 196 and 299 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). He further submits that the petitioner, being an editor of a weekly journal and newspaper, is a journalist and, by profession, would not commit such offences. 4. Learned counsel further contends that the petitioner has not posted any content derogatory to the religious beliefs of the Bhojpuri community. Even if the post were considered objectionable, the 3 petitioner has voluntarily issued an apology. Learned counsel argues that the FIR is baseless, concocted, and motivated by personal vendetta, and therefore, deserves to be quashed. 5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the complainant has filed the FIR to settle personal scores. He contends that the alleged offences under Sections 196 and 299 of the BNS are not made out. Section 196 requires actions that promote enmity, hatred, or disharmony between groups based on religion, race, caste, or community, while Section 299 involves deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings. The petitioner’s apology demonstrates the absence of any deliberate intent to insult the community. 6. Learned State counsel opposes the petition, submitting that once an FIR disclosing cognizable offences has been registered, it must be investigated in accordance with law. Therefore, the petition, according to the State, deserves dismissal. 7. We have considered the submissions and perused the material on record, including the impugned FIR. 8. It is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash an FIR, complaint, or charge-sheet is extraordinary and must be exercised sparingly. Courts ordinarily do not interfere with investigations of cognizable offences. An FIR can be quashed only when the allegations, even if taken at face value, do not constitute an offence. The principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal, AIR 4 1992 SC 605; Rupan Deol Bajaj v. K.P.S. Gill, 1995 SCC (Cri) 1059; Rajesh Bajaj v. State of NCT of Delhi, (1999) 3 SCC 259; Medchl Chemicals & Pharma (P) Ltd. v. Biological E. Ltd., 2000 SCC (Cri) 615; Neharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 315; and State of Orissa v. Saroj Kumar Sahoo, (2005) 13 SCC 540, make it clear that the Court cannot probe the veracity of allegations at the quashing stage. 9. Applying these principles, the contentions raised by the petitioner cannot be adjudicated at this stage. Questions involving factual disputes, appreciation of evidence, or assessment of credibility fall outside the scope of jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNS or Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Based on the material on record, it cannot be conclusively held that the FIR has been filed with mala fide intent. The FIR, prima facie, discloses cognizable offences and therefore warrants investigation. 10. A perusal of the FIR reveals that the complainant alleged that during the Chhath Mahaparv held from 25.10.2025 to 28.10.2025, the petitioner posted content on social media on 30.10.2025, which was highly objectionable and intended to hurt religious sentiments. The post allegedly mocked the festival, insulted its sanctity, and had the potential to disturb public tranquility. The complainant requested registration of the FIR and appropriate action against the petitioner. 11. It is a settled legal principle that once an FIR discloses cognizable offences, the matter must proceed to investigation in accordance with 5 law. Disputed questions of fact, authenticity of documents, or bona fides of the parties can only be determined after proper investigation and trial. At this stage, the High Court cannot interfere with the lawful process of investigation. 12. In view of the foregoing, the petition fails to make out any case for quashing the FIR and is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner is, however, granted liberty to approach the appropriate forum for protection against arrest or anticipatory bail, if so advised. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan