1 2026:CGHC:528-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 653 of 2025 Umesh Kumar Nirmalkar S/o Pawan Kumar Nirmalkar Aged About 32 Years R/o Nayapara Ward No. 4, Near Sharda Mandir, Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director General of Police Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3. Superintendent of Police Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) 4. Station House Officer Police Station - Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Dr. Arpit Lall, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.01.06 17:33:19 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 06.01.2026 1. Heard Dr. Arpit Lall, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the First Information Report bearing Crime No. 42 of 2022 registered at Police Station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) and charge-sheet/Final Report bearing No. 132 of 2022 for the offence under Section 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC and subsequent criminal proceedings filed before CJM, Mahasamund (C.G.). 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an order whereby the complainant may kindly be directed to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation for mental harassment and lodging false FIR against the petitioner with malafide intention. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to 3 grant any other relief/relief’s in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon’ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 3. From a perusal of the prayer and the pleadings in the present petition, it transpires that the charge-sheet has admittedly been submitted against the petitioner and the learned trial Court has already taken cognizance of the offences. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the FIR, the charge-sheet, and the proceedings pending before the learned trial Court. However, in the opinion of this Court, the prayer is defective, as the petitioner has not sought quashing of the order by which cognizance has been taken by the learned trial Court. This reflects that the prayer has been drafted in a casual manner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a fresh petition with an appropriate and complete prayer. 5. Learned State counsel has no objection to the said prayer. 6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty, as prayed for, subject to the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as costs before the Registry of this Court and producing the receipt thereof at the time of filing a fresh petition, if any. The amount so deposited shall be transmitted to the Government Disabled College, Mana Camp, Raipur (C.G.). 4 7. Certified copies of the FIR, charge-sheet, and other documents, if any, shall be returned to the petitioner after retaining photocopies of the same for record. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan