1 CGHC010282232026 2026:CGHC:31837-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1911 of 2026 Himanshu Khandelwal S/o Nandkishor Khandelwal Aged About 47 Years R/o House No. 09, Pragati Nagar, Street No. 1, Risalibhilai, Civic Center Bhilai, Dist. Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station, Purani Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. 2. Rajesh Chamorshikar S/o C.M. Chamorshikar R/o Dhaman Bhatti 8, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Waquar Naiyer, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 27 .07.2026 1. Heard Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Waquar Naiyer, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.07.27 19:01:46 +0530 2 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 this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to allow this petition and quash the FIR dated 27.05.2026 in Crime No. 277 of 2026 for the offence under Section 303(2), 317(4), read with Section 3(5) subsequently added under Section 112, 319(2), 36(3), 338, 343(2), 111, 61(2)(A) of BNS, 2023 & under Section 25 & 26(1) of Chhattisgarh Audyogik Suraksha Adhiniyam, 1990 (as per Police Prativedan dated 09.07.2026) at Police Station Purani Bhilai, Durg, Chhattisgarh and, so far as it relates to the petitioner herein, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.” 3. During the course of arguments, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, after arguing the matter at length, seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to avail the statutory remedy of filing an application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, submitting that the petitioner's earlier application for anticipatory bail has been rejected by the learned trial Court vide order dated 09.07.2026. 4. Learned State counsel submits that he has no objection to the 3 prayer made by learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner. 5. Considering the submissions made by learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner, the prayer for withdrawal is allowed. 6. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. It is, however, made clear that no liberty is granted to the petitioner to file a fresh petition seeking quashment of the aforesaid FIR on the same cause of action. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail the statutory remedy available under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by filing an application for anticipatory bail, in accordance with law. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan