1 CGHC010242902026 2026:CGHC:30159-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1741 of 2026 1. Pooja Sahu W/o Tulsiram Sahu, Aged About 26 Years R/o Birtarai, P. S. Urga, District - Korba (C.G.) 2. Tulsi Ram Sahu, S/o Saheb Lal Sahu, Aged About 33 Years R/o Birtarai, P. S. Urga, District - Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Maalkharoda, District - Sakti (C.G.) 2. Smt. Kirtan Sahu W/o Anil Kumar Sahu, Aged About 25 Years R/o -Birtarai, P. S. -Urga, District Korba Presently R/o - Jamgahan, P. S. Maalkharoda, Distt - Sakti (C.G.) ...Respondents(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Ms. Chetna Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 16.07.2026 1. Heard Ms. Chetna Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent No. 1. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.07.16 17:39:51 +0530 2 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer: “It is therefore, prayed that, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this instant petition and quash FIR bearing Crime No. 25/26 dated 19.01.2026 and charge-sheet bearing No. 52/2026 dated 28.02.2026 filed against the petitioner by the Police Station Maalkharoda, District Sakti (C.G.) for commission of offence which is punishable under Section 85, 3(5) of BNS Act and set aside the order dated 09.04.2026 passed in Criminal Case No. 376 of 2026, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Maalkharoda, District Sakti (C.G.), whereby the Magistrate has taken the cognizance of the charge- sheet and the entire consequential proceedings, in the interest of justice.” 3. On the last date of hearing i.e. 09.07.2026, this Court had passed the following order: “Heard Mr. Rajnish Singh Baghel, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondent No. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the husband of respondent No. 2, namely, Anil Kumar 3 Sahu, is also an accused in the present case. He further submits that the present petition has been filed only on behalf of the sister and brother-in-law of the husband of respondent No. 2. Since the dispute appears to be matrimonial in nature, this Court is of the opinion that the possibility of an amicable settlement deserves to be explored by referring the parties to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. However, in the absence of the husband, who is a necessary party to the dispute, an effective reference to mediation would not be feasible. Upon being apprised of the above, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for and is granted time to file an appropriate petition on behalf of the husband also. List this case in the next week.” 4. Pursuant to the order dated 09.07.2026 passed by this Court, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that efforts were made to file an appropriate petition on behalf of the husband of respondent No. 2, namely, Anil Kumar Sahu, who is also an accused in the present case. However, owing to certain difficulties, the same could not be filed. She, therefore, submits that the present petition may be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition, arraying the husband of respondent No. 2 also as a petitioner, for seeking quashing of the FIR, 4 charge-sheet, the order taking cognizance, and all consequential proceedings. 5. Learned State counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer. 6. Considering the submissions advanced and the fact that the husband of respondent No. 2 is also an accused in the present case, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty reserved in favour of the petitioners to file a fresh petition in accordance with law. 7. Certified copies/original documents, if any, filed along with the present petition be returned to learned counsel for the petitioners after retaining photocopies thereof on record. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan