1 CGHC010237312026 2026:CGHC:30822-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1880 of 2026 Ramjanam Yadav S/o Lautu Yadav Aged About 48 Years R/o Sector 04, Road 27, Quarter No. 16,/c Bhilai Bhatti Police Station District Durg C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Bhilai Bhatti District Durg C.G. 2. M. Dhanlaxmi W/o M. Rama Rao Aged About 54 Years R/o Sector 04, Road, 27, Quarter No. 16/c Bhilai Bhatti Police Station District Durg C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. K. Ankit and Mr. Ayush Lall, Advocates. For Respondent/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.07.22 10:34:50 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 21.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. K. Ankit and Mr. Ayush Lall, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent No. 1. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer: “It is, therefore, prayed that the petition may kindly be allowed and the FIR No. 0059 of 2026, registered by Police Station Bhilai Bhatti, Durg, for the offences punishable under Sections 296 and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023, along with all sequential proceedings in RCC/16684/2026 pending before the sub-ordinate judiciary, may kindly be quashed, in the interest of justice.” 3. From perusal of the pleadings and the reliefs sought in the present petition, it is evident that, admittedly, the charge-sheet has already been filed against the petitioner and the learned trial Court has taken cognizance of the offences alleged therein. The petitioner has sought quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) and the proceedings pending before the learned trial Court. However, no prayer has been made for quashing of the charge-sheet or the order whereby cognizance has been taken. In the considered opinion of this Court, the relief sought is incomplete and legally defective, particularly when the 3 criminal proceedings have already advanced beyond the stage of investigation. The manner in which the prayer has been drafted reflects a casual approach. 4. Upon the Court pointing out the aforesaid defect in the prayer clause, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a fresh petition incorporating an appropriate and complete prayer. 5. Learned State counsel has no objection to the aforesaid prayer. 6. In view of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, and there being no objection from the learned State counsel, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition, if so advised, containing an appropriate and complete prayer in accordance with law. Such liberty shall, however, be subject to the petitioner depositing costs of Rs.2,000/- before the Registry of this Court and producing the receipt thereof at the time of filing the fresh petition, if any. The amount so deposited shall be remitted by the Registry to the Government Disabled College, Mana Camp, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). 7. Certified copies of the FIR, charge-sheet, and other documents, if any, shall be returned to the petitioner after retaining photocopies of the same for record. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan