1 CGHC010238762026 2026:CGHC:28347-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1771 of 2026 Bhupendra Das Vaishnav S/o Shri Krishna Vaishnav Aged About 54 Years R/o Raja Bada Lormi P.S. Lormi, District- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Lormi, District- Mungeli (C.G.) 2. Mahesh Vaishnav S/o Shri Narendra Das Vaishnav Aged About 41 Years R/o Raja Bada Lormi P.S. Lormi, District- Mungeli (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, 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 09.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Anusha Naik, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent No. 1. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.07.09 18:33:32 +0530 2 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS 2023 and in exercise thereof call for the records, if necessary, admit the petition and may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and quash the FIR No. 78 of 2025 as well as charge-sheet filed before the JMFC Lormi on 08.09.2025 and cognizance order dated 08.09.2025, for offence punishable under Section 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, by the police station Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.), cognizance order dated 08.09.2025 which is register as 1149 of 2025 and (if any), all consequent proceedings incidental thereto and orders prejudicial to the petitioner herein and/or pass such orders in favour of the petitioner as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstance of the case.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the present CRMP has been filed seeking quashing of the FIR, the charge- sheet dated 08.09.2025, the cognizance order dated 08.09.2025, and the entire criminal proceeding, the learned trial Court has already framed charges against the petitioner during the pendency of the present petition. He, therefore, prays that the present petition be 3 dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to challenge the order framing charges and to avail such other remedies as may be available in law before the appropriate forum. 4. Prayer is allowed. 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to avail such remedy as may be available in law before the appropriate forum against the order framing charges and/or any subsequent proceedings, if so advised. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan