1 2025:CGHC:12538-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 363 of 2025 Rahul Gupta (In Person) S/o Pawan Kumar Gupta Aged About 42 Years R/o M - 20, Sector - 1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur - 492001 Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : In person. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 17 /03/2025 1 Heard Mr. Rahul Gupta, petitioner, appearing in person as well as Mr. Hariom Rai, learned Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. 2 By this petition under Section 528 read with Section 529 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner seeks for the following relief(s): “1) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to examine the order 2 sheet for the purposes of satisfying itself about the correctness, legality and propriety and thus superintendence over the subordinate court proceedings to ensure a proper cognizance and consequently fair trial. 2) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to order the learnt trial court to remove the names of the petitioner's parents pursuant with the order of the division bench of this honourable court in case number CrMP/1111/2023 to quash the F.I.R. 03/2023 P.S. Mahila Thana, Ambikapur, and consequently proceedings against them in case number RCrC/2100/2023, and thus comply with the orders of the Chhattisgarh High Court. 3) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the virtual appearance of the petitioner, whenever required by the learned trial court in compliance with statue and the law under section 530 B.N.S.S. 4) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to order the learnt trial court to accept all the applications filed through the e-filing module and adjudicate them in accordance with the law. 5) Pass such other order/as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interests of justice for which act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 3 Mr. Gupta, petitioner, appearing in person submits that an FIR bearing Crime No. 3/2023 was lodged against him and his parents namely Pawan Kumar Gupta (father) and Manju Gupta (mother) by his wife namely Radhika Gupta at Police Station, Mahila Thana, Ambikapur, District Surguja for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the IPC and Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1984 on 07.01.2023. The said registration of the FIR was challenged by him and his parents by way of Cr.M.P. No. 1111/2023, before this Court in which this Court had been pleased to quash the FIR so far it related to his parents i.e. Pawan Kumar Gupta and Manju Gupta, vide order dated 15.07.2024, however, the prosecution against the present petitioner was directed to continue. Despite bringing this fact to the knowledge of the learned 3 trial Court, the name of the parents of the petitioner have not been removed from the array of the accused. 4 On the last date of hearing i.e. on 27.02.2025, the petitioner, appearing in person had submitted that he had filed e-applications before the learned trial Court on 21.05.2024 for discharge but the same has not yet been registered and that he had filed four more e-applications which were still pending. In view of the said submission, this Court had directed the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Surguja (Ambikapur) to submit a report as to why the e-applications filed by the petitioner were not registered and decided. 5 Pursuant to the said direction issued by this Court on 27.02.2025, the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Surguja (Ambikapur) had called for an explanation from the concerned trial Judge namely II Civil Judge Junior Division/JMFC, Ambikapur (Surguja) wherein it has been informed by the said trial Judge vide his response dated 07.03.2025 that the e-application dated 20.08.2024 regarding calling for evidence of Tax OfÏcer was taken up and rejected on 21.08.2024 as the proceedings were at the stage of arguments before charge and not for defence witness. So far as the application dated 23.11.2024 regarding permission to appear through video-conferencing was concerned, the same was accepted vide order dated 26.11.2024. The application dated 29.11.2024 regarding taking evidence, applications and giving speaking orders in order sheets presented by accused was taken on record and the matter was proceeded as per rules and orders. Further, a copy of the application dated 21.05.2024 regarding discharge under Section 277 of the Cr.P.C. was at the stage of reply from prosecution, and the same has been taken on record which shall be decided soon. The aforesaid reply given by the learned trial Judge has been forwarded by the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Surguja (Ambikapur) vide his memo dated 11.03.2025 addressed to the Registrar (Judicial) of this High Court. 4 6 From perusal of the above, it transpires that all the e-applications which have been filed by the petitioner have been brought on record of the trial Court concerned where the matter is subjudice and some of the applications have already been decided and disposed of and efforts are being made to dispose of the remaining applications and as such, at this stage, the grievance raised by the petitioner in this petition stands redressed. 7 For the foregoing reasons, this petition stands disposed of. However, if the petitioner has any further grievance with respect to the disposal of his e- applications, he may take recourse to law before the appropriate forum, if so advised. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.03.18 11:45:17 +0530