1 CGHC010198452026 2026:CGHC:27923-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1563 of 2026 Sanjeev Mishra S/o Ramlal Mishra Aged About 38 Years R/o Sai Paradise Devpuri, Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Thana Narayanpur, Distt. Narayanpur (C.G.) 2 - Then Thana Incharge Manoj Banjare, Narayanpur, Narayanpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Janu Khare, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr.Sumit Singh, Dy.A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 07.07.2026 1. Heard Mr.Janu Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr.Sumit Singh, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the respondents/State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2026.07.08 10:16:07 +0530 2 following prayers: “It is therefore, most humbly prayed that, This Hon'ble High court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and kindly be pleased to quash the First information report FIR lodged by the respondent No 1 against the applicant with police station Naryanpur, Narayanpur (CG) dated 10.01.2022 at crime number 07/2022 annexure A/1 for offence committed under section 124A, 120 В, 505(1)(2) IPC and sec 3 police incitement act. Further to pass any other order as per facts and circumstance of the case.” 3. This Court by order dated 22.6.2026 passed the following order:- “Heard Mr. Janu Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State/respondent No. 1. It has been pointed out that the petitioner- Sanjeev Mishra had already approached this Court by filing Cr.M.P. No.977/2022 wherein there were three other petitioners namely Ujjwal Diwan, S. Santosh Kumar and Naveen Rao. The said petition was filed by Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, Advocate which stood dismissed by a co-ordinate Bench on 30.06.2025 on the ground that the petitioners therein have lost interest in pursuing the matter. In the said petition i.e. Cr.M.P. No. 977/2022, a 3 covering memo was filed by Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, Advocate wherein affidavits of the petitioners therein, including Sanjeev Mishra has also been filed and the said deponent has been identified by Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, Advocate, which goes to suggest that the petitioner-Sanjeev Mishra was aware of filing of the earlier petition and even then, the subsequent petition being the present one, has been filed. On a pointed query being made by this Court as to how for the same cause of action, when the earlier petition has been dismissed for want of prosecution, the subsequent petition has been filed by the same petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he may be granted some time to ascertain the same. In view of the above, let a notice be issued to the petitioner Sanjeev Mishra, through the Registrar General as to why proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act be not initiated against him for the aforesaid conduct and why he may not be prosecuted for commission of an offence of perjury. On the next date, Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, Advocate shall also remain present before this Court. Let this case be listed again on 7th July, 2026 and Cr.M.P. No. 977/2022, be also tagged with this petition.” 4. In compliance of the Court’s order dated 22.06.2026 Petitioner Sanjeev Mishra has filed his personal affidavit which states as under:- “1. That the Deponent is the petitioner in the present matter and is well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case. 4 2. That the Deponent tenders his unconditional and sincere apology to this Hon'ble Court for the filing of CRMP No. 1563/2026. The Deponent submits that this was a bonafide mistake arising out of a lack of clarity regarding the status of pending legal proceedings. 3. That the Deponent was previously unaware of the existence of CRMP No. 977/2022. The petitioner's name was inadvertently mis-spelled in the relevant records, which led to the Deponent's inability to track the status of the case. Consequently, the present petition (CRMP No. 1563/2026) was filed under the mistaken belief that the relief sought had not been previously petitioned. 4. That the Deponent further submits that he has been embroiled in multiple litigations, specifically four FIRs arising from the same incident. Due to the complexity of these multiple proceedings, his incarceration from 10.01.2022 to April 2022, and subsequent issuance of fresh warrants resulting in bail on 27.05.2022 Annex as A/2, the Deponent suffered from severe confusion regarding the current status and docket numbers of his various cases. 5. That the Deponent also submits that there was a lack of effective communication with his legal counsel during the relevant period, which contributed to this inadvertent error. The Deponent had signed documents for a challenge regarding FIR No. 34/2022; however, due to the aforementioned confusion and lack of coordination, 5 the filing was executed incorrectly. 6. That the Deponent deeply regrets the inadvertent waste of this Hon'ble Court's valuable time. The Deponent assures this Hon'ble Court that there was no deliberate intention to mislead or abuse the process of law. 7. That the Deponent most humbly prays that this unconditional apology may be accepted, and this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to condone the bonafide error in the interest of justice.” 5. The affidavit filed by the petitioner is taken on record. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as the petitioner has tendered his unconditional and sincere apology, he seeks permission to withdraw the present petition. 7. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Presence of Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, Advocate, is discharged. The petitioner is cautioned to be careful in future. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu