1 2026:CGHC:22431-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1301 of 2026 Ajay Namdeo S/o Ramlal Namdeo, Aged About 46 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Purani Basti, Keshwari, Keshawahi, Shahdol, District- Shahdol (M.P.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Superintendent of Police District- Gourela - Pendra -Marwahi (C.G.) 2 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Marwahi, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) 3 - Amit Kumar Gupta S/o Ramanuj Gupta Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Nagar Panchayat Marwahi, Police Station Marwahi, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Raghvendra Verma, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 13.05 .2026 1. Heard Mr. Raghvendra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents No.1 & 2. ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2026.05.14 10:11:12 +0530 2 2. By filing the present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’), the petitioner has prayed for following relief :- “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned FIR dated 16-09-2025 bearing Crime No. 164/2025 registered at Police Station Marwahi, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) against the petitioner for the alleged offences under Section 318(4), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 61(2) (A) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and also qush/set- aside the impugned final report No.157/2025 dated 14-12-2025 filed by the Police Station Marwahi, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Marwahi, District Gourela-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) for the offence under Section 318(4), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 61(2) (A) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, in which the petitioner has been enlisted as abscond accused and also the criminal proceeding as against the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant/respondent No.2 has lodged the FIR alleging large- scale cheating and forgery in respect of valuable security, wherein an amount of Rs. 1,59,60,000/- is stated to have been dishonestly obtained from the complainant by way of forged documents and criminal conspiracy against certain named accused persons. It is further submitted that during investigation, the police authorities 3 have collected various documents, pen drives, tender-related papers, mobile phones, etc., and thereafter filed the charge-sheet. It is contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and shown as an absconding accused in the charge-sheet under Section 193(9) of the BNSS without there being any material whatsoever against him. Learned counsel submits that neither the FIR nor the statements of witnesses nor the seized material connect the petitioner with the alleged offence, and even the prosecution witnesses have not attributed any role to the petitioner. It is, therefore, submitted that in absence of any incriminating material, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner is wholly unjustified and amounts to abuse of the process of law. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner showing him as an absconding accused on the basis of material collected during investigation. It is further submitted that the petitioner has not challenged the order taking cognizance and, therefore, at this stage, the proceedings cannot be interfered with in exercise of inherent jurisdiction. Learned State counsel accordingly prays for dismissal of the petition. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the material available on record. 4 6. From perusal of the charge-sheet, it transpires that the complainant Amit Kumar Gupta has alleged that the accused persons, in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy, induced him on the pretext of supply of sand and execution of tender work, and by preparing forged purchase orders, transport permits and other documents, dishonestly induced him to part with a total amount of Rs. 1,59,60,000/-, causing him substantial financial loss. It further appears that during investigation, certain documentary and electronic evidence, including mobile phones, WhatsApp communications and related records, were seized, and the complicity of the named accused persons, including Narendra Kumar Sharma and others, was found prima facie established. 7. It further appears from the charge-sheet that the present petitioner has been shown as an absconding accused in respect of the alleged offence, and investigation has been stated to be continuing for collection of evidence against other co-accused persons. The State has accordingly submitted the final report under Section 193 BNSS before the competent court, and sufficient material has been found against the arrested accused persons for proceeding further in accordance with law. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and on careful consideration of the material placed on record, this Court finds that the charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner showing him as an absconding accused, and the 5 petitioner has not challenged the order taking cognizance passed by the learned trial Court. At this stage, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter in exercise of inherent jurisdiction. 9. Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to take recourse to such remedies as may be available to him in accordance with law, if so advised. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu