1 2026:CGHC:6724-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 65 of 2026 Devendra Nishad S/o Shri Shivdayal Nishad Aged About 32 Years R/o Gram Batera, Thana Dondi Loahra, District Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Home Af- fairs, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Director General of Police Chhattisgarh Police Headquarters, Sec- tor-19, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Inspector General of Police Durg Range, District Durg Chhattisgarh 4 - Superintendent of Police Balod, Office of The Superintendent of Po- lice, Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh 5 - S H O Thana Dondi Lohara, District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Abdul Moin Khan, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 06.02 .2026 1 Heard Mr. Abdul Moin Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State/respondents No.1 to 4. ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2026.02.07 11:32:06 +0530 2 2 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following relief(s):- “10.1. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority / respondent no.03 to register the FIR and initiate investigate in the case of the petitioner. 10.2. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to initiate a departmental / disciplinary action against the respondent authorities/ respondent no. 03 for willful dereliction of duty. 10.3. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to consider and take appropriate action on the representation / Annexure P1 filed by the petitioner. 10.4. That, any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the date of incident, i.e., 09.10.2025, the petitioner was engaged in agricultural work along with his wife. Upon returning to his house, he found that the door lock had been broken and valuable articles including one silver bangle (kangan), five pairs of anklets (payal), one neck chain, one pair of silver bracelets, three pieces of armband, three pieces of gold leaf (patti) and other valuable household items, collectively valued at approximately ₹3,00,000/-, were stolen from the almirah/locker by some unknown person, 3 thereby making the petitioner a victim of a cognizable offence of theft. It is further submitted that when the petitioner approached Police Station Dondi-Lohara for registration of an FIR, the respondent No.05, in gross violation of settled law, failed and refused to register the FIR despite the offence being cognizable in nature. Not only this, the petitioner and his family members were subjected to misbehavior and threats, and the mobile phone of the petitioner’s son was illegally confiscated without any authority of law. 4 Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner thereafter made several representations and complaints before the concerned authorities; however, no action whatsoever was taken. Ultimately, the petitioner was constrained to submit a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, respondent No.04, on 08.01.2026, but even the said complaint has remained unattended till date, reflecting complete apathy and failure on the part of the respondent authorities. It is submitted that such persistent inaction on the part of the respondent authorities is arbitrary, illegal, and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The continued denial of access to justice has caused immense mental trauma, financial loss, and hardship to the petitioner and his family, leaving the petitioner with no efficacious alternative remedy except to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. 4 5 Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that the grievance of the petitioner can be very well redressed before the Court below by filing an application under Section 156(3) or 200 of the Cr.P.C.(now, under Section 175(3) or under Section 223 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). He further submits that the controversy involved in the present matter has already been decided by the High Court of Allahabad in Misc. Bench No. 24492 of 2020 : Waseem Haider vs. State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home Others vide judgment and order dated 14.12.2020 as well as by this Court in WPCR No. 333 of 2020 (Akhilesh Agrawal vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) decided on 12.04.2023, dismissing the said petition, hence, the present petition be also dismissed in terms of the said order. 6 Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy before appropriate Forum. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu