1 2026:CGHC:21285-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1263 of 2026 1 - Dinesh Sahu S/o Chhat Ram Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o Housing Board Colony, Chilhati, Mopka, EWS - 79, MOPKA, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Nitesh Kumar Sahu S/o Chhat Ram Sahu Aged About 29 Years R/o H. Village- Dhardei, P.S.- Shivrinarayan, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through-Station House Officer, P.S. Mahila Thana, Kalibari, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Smt. K. Uma Sahu W/o Pushpendra Kumar Sahu Aged About 29 Years R/o Near Chhthwa Talab, Bhanpuri, Raipur, Khamtarai, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr.R.K.Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No.1-State : Mr.Saurabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 7.5.2026 1. Heard Mr.R.K.Kesharwani, learned counsel for the petitioners as BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2026.05.07 14:43:20 +0530 2 well as Mr.Saurabh Sahu, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for respondent No.1/State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking following relief(s): “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned FIR No. 31/2025, dt. 05/05/2025, offence U/s 85 & 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023, registered by P. S. - Mahila Thana, Raipur, impugned Charge Sheet No. 37/2025, dt. 24/06/2025 and taking cognizance of the impugned criminal proceedings on 15/07/2025 in Criminal Case No. 28867/2025 by the learned JMFC, Raipur (C.G.] in the ends of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the brothers-in-law of private respondent No. 2 and that their names were not mentioned in the FIR; however, during the course of investigation, their names were subsequently added. 4. Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for respondent No. 1/State submitted that, as per the allegations contained in the body of the FIR, the petitioners, along with the father-in-law, disliked respondent No. 2 on account of the marriage of their brother with respondent No. 2 and had also assaulted her. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and that the MLC report of respondent No. 2 has also been annexed. 3 5. In view of the above, we do not find any scope for interference in the present petition. Accordingly, the petition, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- /- Sd (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu