1 2025:CGHC:7881-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 562 of 2025 1. Subhash Shrivas S/o Ramji Aged About 60 Years R/o Near Secl Hospital, Bankimongra, Police Station Bankimongra, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2. Kamla Shrivas W/o Subhash Shrivas Aged About 55 Years R/o Near Secl Hospital, Bankimongra, Police Station Bankimongra, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3. Gayatri Shrivas D/o Subhash Shrivas Aged About 30 Years R/o Near Secl Hospital, Bankimongra, Police Station Bankimongra, District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, P.S. Bankimongra, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2. Sarita Sahu W/o Sampat Sahu R/o In Front Of Secl Hospital, Bankimongra, Police Station Bankimongra, District Korba Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.02.17 10:55:57 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 14.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for respondent No. 1/State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the instant petition and quash the impugned charge-sheet No. 158 of 2024 dated 07.12.2024 (Annexure P/1) submitted by the Police Station Bankimongra, District Korba (C.G.) before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) arising out of Crime No. 93 of 2024 and copy of order dated 09.12.2024 (Annexure P/2), and the resultant proceeding pending before learned JMFC Korba District Korba (C.G.) bearing Criminal Case No. 3646 of 2024 (Annexure P/2) (State vs. Subhash Shrivas and Others) being tried for offence under Sections 294, 323, 34 of the IPC, in the interest of justice.” 3 3. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant, namely, Smt. Sarita Sahu has lodged the written complaint on 24.05.2024 under Sections 294, 323, 34 of the IPC against the petitioners. That due to some dispute regarding construction of Board Complex the petitioners has assaulted Smt. Sarita Sahu some hands and fist. Subsequently, FIR was registered vide Crime No. 93 of 2024 in Police Station Bankimongra, District Korba. On the basis of complaint, the Police lodged FIR on 24.04.2024 and started investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed in which the present petitioner has also been implicated as an accused in this crime and criminal proceeding has been initiated before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katghora, District Korba which is numbered as Criminal Case No. 3646 of 2024. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after perusal of the entire charge-sheet no prima facie case for the offence under Sections 294, 323 and 34 of the IPC has made out against the present petitioners. He also submits that in the present case the Police authorities during the investigation have collected any material evidence against the present petitioners to implicate them in the present crime and as per the directions and guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, petitioners has been falsely implicated in this case. 5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the FIR was lodged by the petitioners vide Crime No. 92 of 2024, which is the first FIR regarding the alleged assault and just to threatened and to put undue influence on the petitioners a false FIR has been lodged. He would submit the FIR was lodged by the petitioners vide Crime No. 92 of 2024, the investigation had already been completed and the charge-sheet 4 submitted before the competent Court. If the entire allegation of FIR as well the charge-sheet has been taken as it is then also no offence has been made out against the present petitioners. Therefore, the petitioners most humbly and respectfully begs to prefers this petition before this Court for seeking appropriate relief and necessary direction of this Court and quashing of FIR as well as entire criminal proceeding against the petitioners. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 7. We have perused the prayers and pleadings made in the petition along with the annexures annexed in this petition. 8. Considering the fact that the complainant/respondent No. 2 has made complaint and lodged FIR against the petitioners and similarly, the petitioners have also lodged FIR, in which charge-sheet had already been submitted before the competent Court and criminal proceedings is pending and looking to the version and counter-version of the parties with regard to the incident that both sides have received injuries, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter and accordingly, the present petition is dismissed leaving it open to the parties to co-operate with the trial, which may be concluded expeditiously. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan