1 2025:CGHC:10698 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 803 of 2025 • Smt. Nisha Sahu W/o Late Jagannath Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o H. No. 15, Riddhi Siddhi Lotus Park, Boriyakala, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Home Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Director General Of Police Police Head Quarter, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Superintendent Of Police Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4. Station House Officer Police Station Mujgahan, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. T.K. Jha, Advocate For State : Ms. Binu Sharma, P.L Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 05/03/2025 1. The present petition is not challenging any particular order but is being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent authority in not registering the FIR (in 0) on the complaint disclosing commission of cognizable offences moved by the petitioner, hence this petition. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.03.26 11:23:05 +0530 2 2. Brief facts of the case are that, on 15.07.2023 husband of the petitioner (Jagannath Sahu) died after long illness, during the treatment at Mittal Hospital Junwani, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.). During the course of treatment the ATM card issued in the Name of Late Jagannath Sahu was kept by her elder brother (Bodhan Lal Sahu) without knowledge of the petitioner and after the death of her husband on 06.08.2023 he was withdrawal of Rs.10000/- through ATM. Thereafter he was fraudulently withdrawal all the amount of Rs.12,91,710/- and closed the account and the Bodhan Lal Sahu is also illegally keeping the Car (MH 14 EY 8725) which is registered in the name of Petitioner's husband. 3. The petitioner has made complaint before police station Mujgahan (District Raipur), the Assistant Sub Inspector did not give the receipt, nor did lodge the FIR. Thereafter the petitioner, feeling helpless, moved an application before the Superintendent of Police Raipur, District Raipur for lodging of FIR but FIR has not been lodged, there after the other day the ASI called the Petitioner and recorded her statement, took her signature and allowed the petitioner to take photo on her mobile. The ASI spoke the respondents on his mobile, but no fruitful result has come out. There after Petitioner has many time circumambulated the Police Station groveled to ASI, but no action has been taken on her complaint. the BNSS 2023 has replaced CrPC 1973 and provisions of registration of a cognizable offence is now provided under sec 173 of BNSS 3 instead of Sec 154 CrPC and police officers are bound to register FIR in case of cognizable offence, but no offence has been registered. Hence, the petition before this Hon'ble Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite of the intimation regarding commission of cognizable offence, no offence has been registered till date. He further submits that the amount withdraw by the Bodhan Lal Sahu is an offence because the petitioner is legal heir (wife) of the deceased Jagannath Sahu. He further contented that in the matter of Bhushan Singh Rathiya vs. State in WP(Cr) 09 of 2016, the Hon’ble High Court vide its order dated 26.08.2016, directed the Secretary, Home Affairs as we ass the DGP Chhattisgarh to comply the order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in matter of Lalita Kumar vs. Government of UP and Ors reported in SCC 2014 (2).] 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the Hon’ble Court be pleased to allow the petition and direct the respondent to register the FIR as per application moved by the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 6. Learned counsel for the State submits that she has no objection on the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the documents annexed with the petition. 8. If the police has not registered the case on the basis of complaint made by the complainant. The complainant has right 4 to file complaint before the Judicial Magistrate First Class under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C 1973 and also has right to file complaint case under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. before the competent Magistrate therefore, this petition is disposed of with liberty to file complaint or Complaint Case before the concerned Judicial Magistrate First Class under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. 9. Accordingly, instant petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE vaishali