1 2025:CGHC:7768 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 547 of 2025 1 - Shrikishan Sinha S/o Late Ramlal Sinha Aged About 55 Years R/o Village- Devkot, Police Station Gurur, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Chowki- Kanwar, Police Station- Gurur, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aman Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mrs. Sunita Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 13/02/2025 1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 against the order dated 08.10.2024 passed in Criminal Case No. 527/2024 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Balod, District-Balod (C.G.). 2. Brief facts of the case is that on 05.01.2024, an FIR was lodged 2 by the Rakesh Kumar Sahu to the effect that an unknown vehicle dashed the motorcycle of Parmeshwar Sahu near Rice Mill of Village-Devkot, due to which he received injuries. On the basis of above report, the FIR bearing crime no. 4/2024 was registered for the offence under Sections 279, 337, 338 of IPC against the unknown person. On 29.01.2024 the statement of injured Parmeshwar Sahu was recorded, in which, the tractor owned by the petitioner was involved into the accident. On the basis of above statement of injured, the tractor of petitioner bearing registration no. Cg 07 N 4440 was seized by the police and upon completion of investigation, the charge sheet was submitted before the learned JMFC, Balod against the petitioner. The petitioner has obtained the CCTV Footage and after examining the CCTV Footage, the petitioner came to know that the accident occurred by Eco Van bearing registration no. 11 AJ 4847 which is recorded in the name of one Pratibha Sahu, resident of Palari, P.S.-Sanaud, District-Balod (C.G.). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate that no accident has been occurred by the tractor of the petitioner, but his tractor has falsely been involved in the accident after about 25 days of the accident. The learned trial court has failed to appreciate that initially the FIR was lodged against the unknown vehicle but subsequently the tractor of the petitioner has been involved in the said accident. 4. Learned counsel for the State contended that the order of the Trial 3 Court is correct and does not suffer from any illegality and the present petition is not maintainable, therefore prays to dismiss the petition. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Perusal of record would show that after thorough investigation of the said incident by the investigating officer, the charge sheet was presented before the trial court against the accused/applicant Mr. Kishan Sinha. A perusal of the charge sheet prima facie shows that the accused has committed the crime because after investigation the charge sheet has been presented against the accused on the basis of which the court has taken cognizance of the case. There is no provision in the law for re-investigation after cognizance has been taken if there is no peculiar or supervening circumstances. Apart from this, it is also noteworthy that the police can be directed to investigate but they cannot be directed to investigate through any specific CCTV footage. Apart from this, the accused/applicant can prove his innocence by presenting the CCTV footage as defense evidence. Therefore, keeping in view the above reasons, the learned trial court has rightly rejected the application of the accused/applicant under Section 156 of Cr.P.C. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the order dated 08.10.2024 and considering the contentions of the counsels, this Court is of the opinion that the order passed by the trial court does not suffer from any illegality or perversity or any 4 jurisdictional error. 8. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima