1 2026:CGHC:6723-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 53 of 2026 1 - Noor Begam D/o Moh. Yaqub Aged About 58 Years R/o E-68, Aishwarya Kingdom, Kachna, Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Ayesha Siddiqua D/o Late Mohd. Idrish Aged About 50 Years R/o E A C Colony, Opposite- Khalsa School, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Pandri, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Bushra Sharif Wd/o Late Mohammad Sharif Aged About 44 Years R/o Bungalow No. C/18, Amaltaspuram Colony, Police Station- Kotwali, Dhamtari, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Deputy 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. Kshitij Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State/respondent No.1. 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 petitioners with the following relief(s):- “10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ direction / order to the respondent authorities to produce entire records pertaining to the instant case; 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/direction/order of appropriate nature quashing the impugned FIR No.0005/2025, Dated 05.01.2025 registered at P.S. Pandri, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.), for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 R/w. Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; 10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ / direction / order of appropriate nature, thereby the Police Station Pandri be directed to submit the closure report before the Trial Court and in turn they be restrained from calling the Petitioners time and again for recording the statements without serving clear 07 days notice in accordance with law; 10.4 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ / direction / order, quashing any consequential action/ proceeding pursuant to the impugned FIR. 10.5 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s) as it may deem fit.” 3 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the entire criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.0005/2025 are nothing but a gross abuse of the process of law, inasmuch as a purely civil and family property dispute has been deliberately given a criminal colour. It is contended that the FIR was registered without any preliminary enquiry, despite the allegations spanning nearly a decade, and even after lapse of more than one year no final report has been filed. Learned counsel further submits that the foundational allegation of non-payment of ₹2.00 Crores is demonstrably false, as bank records conclusively show that the amount, and even more, has already been paid by petitioner No.1 to the complainant pursuant to a duly registered family settlement deed. It is urged that the complainant, herself being an Advocate, was fully aware of the settlement and had acknowledged the same through multiple documents, yet has lodged a mala fide FIR to pressurise the petitioners. It is further submitted that the repeated summoning and prolonged detention of petitioner No.1 at the police station amounts to harassment and misuse of investigative powers, warranting interference of this Court in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. 4. Having considered the submissions advanced on beahlf of the parties as also considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that though the Court is not inclined, at this stage, to enter into the merits of the allegations contained in the FIR or to adjudicate 4 upon the rival claims of the parties, it cannot remain a silent spectator to an investigation which has remained inconclusive for an inordinately long period. The prolonged pendency of investigation, despite repeated appearance of the petitioners and submission of documents, has the potential of resulting in harassment and causing serious prejudice to their liberty and dignity. 5. It is trite law that investigation must be fair, impartial and expeditious, and once sufficient opportunity has been availed by the Investigating Agency, the same cannot be kept pending indefinitely. The power of investigation cannot be permitted to be used as a tool of oppression or coercion, nor can the sword of uncertainty be allowed to hang endlessly over the heads of the accused. 6. Accordingly, this Court deems it appropriate to issue a direction to strike a balance between the rights of the petitioners and the statutory powers of the Investigating Agency. The respondent– State is, therefore, directed to ensure that the investigation arising out of FIR No.0005/2025, dated 05.01.2025, registered at Police Station Pandri, District Raipur (C.G.), is concluded strictly in accordance with law, without any further undue delay. 7. The Investigating Agency shall positively complete the investigation within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall submit its final police 5 report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (now Section 193 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) before the competent jurisdictional Court, in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu