1 2026:CGHC:7273-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No.784 of 2020 Amit Kumar Sahoo S/o Suresh Sahoo Aged About 35 Years R/o 1, Tehseel And Thana Bisra, District Sundargarh - 770036 Odisha., ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Station House Officer, P.S. Suhela, District Baloda Bazar Chhattisgarh. 2 - Hemkumar Sahu S/o Ramkhilawan Sahu Working As Munshi At Munshi At Neha Transport Co. R/o Village Hirmi, P. S. Suhela District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Praveen Soni along with Ms. Shital Soni, Advocates. For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, G.A. For Respondent No.2 : None, though served. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.02.11 10:45:08 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 10.02.2026 1. Heard Mr. Praveen Soni, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Priyank Rathi, learned Government Advocate for the State/ Respondent. 2. The present Cr.M.P has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayer:- “It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly allow this petition and remove the Petitioner name from FIR No. 0270/2019 registered in Police- Station Suhela, District Baloda Bazar C.G. including Petitioner name U/s. 34, 120-B, 407, 411, 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. on dated 16.10.2019 at around 16:10 O'clock, in the interest of justice. Also quash the FIR and Charge-Sheet, wherever present Applicant-Name is mentioned as accused, in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that although the Petitioner has challenged the charge-sheet in the present case, a perusal of the said charge-sheet indicates that the investigation qua the Petitioner is still pending and no supplementary charge- sheet has yet been filed. 3 4. In view of the foregoing, this Court is of the considered opinion that at the present stage, no cause of action survives in favour of the Petitioner so as to warrant interference in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC. 5. A perusal of the material on record indicates that the investigation qua the Petitioner is still pending and no supplementary charge-sheet has been filed against him till date. In such circumstances, the challenge raised in the present Petition is premature and does not call for adjudication on merits. 6. Accordingly, the present CRMP stands dismissed at this stage, with liberty reserved in favour of the Petitioner to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law, in the event any supplementary charge-sheet is filed against him in future. It is further observed that the Petitioner is already protected by an order of anticipatory bail passed in M.Cr.C.(A) No.564/2020, which shall continue to operate in accordance with law.” Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Priya