1 CGHC010263962026 2026:CGHC:30179-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1791 of 2026 1 - Raghunandan Pansari S/o Kedarnath Pansari Aged About 66 Years R/o 103, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Bara Bazar, Saks Avenue, Kolkata (W.B.) 2 - Shruti Pansari @ Shruti Bagari W/o Anuj Pansari Aged About 34 Years R/o 55 Ramesh Mitter Road, Bhawanipore, Kolkata (West Bengal) 3 - Manju Pansari W/o Raghunandan Pansari Aged About 60 Years R/o 103, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Bara Bazar, Circle Avenue, Kolkata (West Bengal) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pandri, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Anant Dave (Complainant) S/o Late Shri A.B. Dave Aged About 55 Years Director of M/s Nakoda Ispat Ltd. R/o Anand Niketan Colony, Avanti Vihar Road, Raipur - 492007. (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy Advocate General ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2026.07.17 10:43:11 +0530 2 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 Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Sumit Singh, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State/respondents. 2. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for following relief:- “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow the present petition and quash the impugned FIR No. 108/2023 dated 27.03.2023 registered at Police Station Pandri, District Raipur for the offences under Sections ions 409, 420 420 & 120B of I.P.C. against the petitioners, in the peculiar factual matrix of the case and in the interest of justice.” 3. It is pertinent to note that when the matter was taken up on 10.07.2026, this Court, noticing that the FIR had been registered on 27.03.2023 and that the investigation had remained pending for an inordinate period without submission of the final police report, directed the Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh to call for an explanation from the Senior Superintendent of Police concerned regarding the reasons for the delay in completion of the investigation and to disclose the action, if any, taken against the Investigating Officer responsible for such delay. 3 4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, submits that in compliance with the order dated 10.07.2026 passed by this Court, instructions were issued by the Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh calling for an explanation from the Superintendent of Police/Deputy Commissioner of Police (North), Raipur regarding the delay in completion of the investigation. It is submitted that show-cause notices have also been issued to all the Investigating Officers who had dealt with the investigation of Crime No.108/2023. He further submits that during the pendency of the present petition, the investigation has since been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed before the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur on 26.02.2026. 5. During the course of hearing, this Court deemed it appropriate to call for a status report from the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur regarding the present status of Criminal Case arising out of Crime No.108/2023 registered at Police Station Pandri. In response thereto, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur has forwarded a communication dated 16.07.2026, from which it transpires that, after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed on 26.02.2026 against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. It is further revealed that the accused persons have already been released on anticipatory bail in compliance with the orders passed by this Court in the respective MCRC petitions and that the criminal case 4 is presently pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur at the stage of consideration of charge/pre-charge arguments, the next date of hearing being fixed as 23.07.2026. 6. From the material brought on record, it is evident that the investigation had already culminated in filing of the charge-sheet on 26.02.2026 and the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur had taken cognizance thereof much prior to the institution of the present petition. It has also come on record that the present petition itself was filed only on 08.07.2026, by which time the criminal proceedings had already progressed and the case was pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur. 7. The status report received from the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur further reveals that the criminal case arising out of Crime No.108/2023 is presently pending at the stage of consideration of charge/pre-charge arguments and the next date of hearing has been fixed as 23.07.2026. However, the aforesaid material facts, namely the filing of the charge-sheet on 26.02.2026, the taking of cognizance by the learned Magistrate, and the pendency of the criminal proceedings at the stage of consideration of charge, were not disclosed by the petitioners while filing the present petition on 08.07.2026. 8. Such deliberate non-disclosure of material and subsequent events amounts to suppression of material facts. The petitioners have, thus, failed to approach this Court with clean hands, thereby 5 disentitling themselves from invoking the discretionary and equitable jurisdiction of this Court. 9. It is a settled principle of law that a litigant invoking the discretionary and equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is under a solemn obligation to approach the Court with clean hands and make full and fair disclosure of all material facts. Suppression of such material facts disentitles a party from claiming any equitable relief. 10. That apart, this Court cannot lose sight of the fact that once the charge-sheet had already been filed and cognizance had been taken by the competent criminal Court, the challenge to the continuance of the criminal proceedings, if any, ought to have been directed against the charge-sheet as well as the order taking cognizance. The petitioners, however, have chosen to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court without disclosing these subsequent developments and without laying any challenge to the charge- sheet or the order taking cognizance, which constitute the very foundation of the criminal proceedings. Such an approach reflects lack of due diligence and has resulted in unnecessary consumption of the valuable judicial time of this Court. 11. Accordingly, the present petition, being devoid of merit and suffering from suppression of material facts, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only). The said amount shall be deposited by the 6 petitioners before the Registry of this Court within a period of two weeks from today. Upon such deposit, the Registry shall remit the said amount to the Government Special School for Visually Handicapped Boys and Girls, Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh to be utilized for the welfare of its students. 12. It is, however, made clear that dismissal of the present petition shall not preclude the petitioners from availing such remedy as may be available to them in law. It shall be open to the petitioners to institute appropriate proceedings challenging the charge-sheet dated 26.02.2026 as well as the order taking cognizance, if so advised, and such proceedings shall be considered on their own merits, in accordance with law, without being influenced by the dismissal of the present petition. 13. It is further directed that certified copies of the documents annexed with the petition, if any, shall be returned to learned counsel for the petitioner after obtaining photocopies thereof for the record. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu