1 2026:CGHC:6952-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 414 of 2026 Narottam Lal Yadav S/o Bhagirathi Yadav Aged About 66 Years R/o Ward No. 10, Jairamnagar, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director General Of Police Police Department, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent Of Police Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 4 - Station House Officer Police Station Ajak Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 5 - Ku. Alina Rai D/o Vedprakash Rai Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Amora, Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Pawan Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Govt. Advocate VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.02.11 20:07:17 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 09/02/2026 1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred by the petitioner/accused Narottam Lal Yadav, seeking quashment of First Information Report No. 01/2026 dated 05.01.2026, registered at Police Station Ajak Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh), for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(d) and 3(1)(e) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, on the ground that the FIR is false, frivolous, malicious and an abuse of the process of law, and that even if the allegations made therein are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, no prima facie case is made out against the petitioner, warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction.. 2. The petitioner has filed the present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition with the following reliefs:- “1. That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the instant petition under section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023 filed by the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 3 2. That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned FIR No. 01/2026 registered on dated 05.01.2026 at police station Ajak Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh filed under section 296, 351(2), 3(5) of B.N.S. and section 3(2) (va), 3 (1)(d), 3(1)(e) of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, in the interest of justice. 3. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly grant any other reliefs in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned FIR has been registered in a mechanical manner without any preliminary verification and is based on false, fabricated and concocted allegations, as the petitioner was not present at the alleged place of occurrence on the date and time of the incident and, in fact, was present in the Court premises in connection with another case, for which applications under the Right to Information Act have already been moved seeking CCTV footage and gate pass details to establish his alibi; it is further contended that even if the contents of the FIR are taken on their face value and accepted in entirety, the essential ingredients of the offences under Sections 296, 351(2) and 3(5 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita as well as Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(d) and 3(1) (e) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are not attracted, as 4 there are no specific or intentional caste-based allegations made in public view against the petitioner; learned counsel further submits that the FIR is manifestly attended with mala fide intention, has been lodged only to harass and pressurize the petitioner, and permitting the criminal proceedings to continue would amount to abuse of the process of law, thereby warranting interference by this Hon’ble Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 4. Learned State counsel, opposing the prayer, raises a formal objection and submits that the present petition is not maintainable in law, as the FIR discloses commission of cognizable offences and the investigation is still at a nascent stage; it is contended that the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy available under law and the inherent jurisdiction of this Court ought not to be invoked in a routine manner; learned State counsel further submits that the allegations made in the FIR require thorough investigation and factual adjudication, which cannot be undertaken in proceedings under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and therefore, prays for dismissal of the petition. 5. 5. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that at this stage it would not be appropriate to examine the merits of the matter in detail, as learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action with better, clear 5 and effective pleadings and by placing all relevant documents on record; accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to approach this Court again, in accordance with law. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved