1 2025:CGHC:12532-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 367 of 2024 1 - Faisal Usmani S/o Mohammad Jamil Ahmad Usmani Aged About 30 Years Caste Muslim, Resident Of Irrigation Colony Darri, District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Mohammad Jamil Ahmad S/o Late Abdul Jahinfani Aged About 58 Years Caste Muslim, Resident Of Irrigation Colony Darri, District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ashiya Usmani W/o Mohammad Jamil Usmani Aged About 52 Years Caste Muslim, Resident Of Irrigation Colony Darri, District - Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Superintendent Of Police, Ambikapur, District - Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Station House Officer Police Mahila Thana - Ambikapur, District - Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Farheen Saba W/o Faisal Usmani Aged About 28 Years R/o Jai Stambh Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN 2 Chowk, Ambikapur Surguja, District - Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh. (Mob No. 6267963526) (Complainant) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Sumit Singh, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Advocate Hon'ble S hri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 17/03/2025 1. Present petition has been filed challenging the charge sheet arising out of FIR No. 48/2022, registered against them for the offences under Section 498-A and 315 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Ambikapur, District Ambikapur (C.G.). 2. The petitioners have filed the present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition with the following relief: “It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may allow the petition and also be pleased to quash the charge sheet filed against them, arising out of the Crime No. 48/2022 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana Ambikapur, District Ambikapur (C.G.), in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the charges have been framed against the petitioners in the matter, but the evidence has not been recorded, and the order framing charge has 3 not been challenged in the present petition, as such they want to withdraw the present petition. 4. The submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners is not opposed by the State counsel. 5. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, that the charges have been framed in the matter, the present CRMP stand dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to take recourse to challenge the order of framing charge, if so advised. 6. Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the annexures to the learned counsel for the petitioners after retaining the attested true copy of the same. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved