1 CGHC010313162026 2026:CGHC:37299-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 484 of 2026 Atma Ram Yadav S/o- Shri Dhupchand Yadav, Aged About 29 Years R/o-Chhatamuda Bypass Chowk, Bypass Road, Raigarh, District- Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)-496001 ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District-Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarters, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Inspector General Of Police, Bilaspur Range, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - The Superintendent Of Police , District- Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 5 - The Station House Officer, Police Station Jutemill, District- Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 6 - Brijesh Yadav, S/o- Shri Surendra Yadav, R/o- Village Sangeetrai, P.S.- Jutemill, District- Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Hari Agrawal, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 5/State : Mr.Ashish Shukla, Additional Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2026.08.20 17:38:50 +0530 2 Order On Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 20.08.2026 1. Heard Mr.Hari Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr.Ashish Shukla, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents No.1 to 5/State. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with following reliefs:- “a. Issue a writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ directing the Respondent authorities more particularly Respondent No. 3 & 5 to ensure a fair, Impartial, time-bound and effective investigation into FIR No. 356/2026 (Annexure P-3) registered for offence punishable under section Sections 115(2), 296, 3(5) and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Jutemill, District Raigarh, and to proceed against the accused named therein in accordance with law; b. Issue a writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ directing that the investigation of FIR No. 355/2026 (Annexure P-4) registered for offence punishable under section Sections 115(2), 296, 3(5) and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023, at Police Station Jutemill, District Raigarh against the Petitioner, his brother Vivek Yadav and his father Dhoopchand Yadav be withdrawn from Police Station Jutemill and be transferred to and conducted by an independent Special Investigation Team comprising officers from a District other than Raigarh, 3 or, in the alternative, by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), Chhattisgarh, and that such investigation be completed within a time-bound period to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court; c. To issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing an independent inquiry into the conduct of the officials by of Police Station Jutemill concerning the delay in registration of the Petitioner's complaints, the circumstances surrounding the registration of FIR No. 355/2026, and the allegations of collusion set out in Annexure P-5, P-6 (Colly) & Annexure P-7 (hereinabove), and directing that appropriate departmental/disciplinary action be taken against the officials found responsible, in accordance with law; d. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in with the facts & circumstances of case.” 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that though FIR No. 356/2026 registered on the Petitioner’s complaint, Respondent No. 6 lodged a counter FIR, being FIR No. 355/2026, against the Petitioner, his brother and his father. It is contended that the counter FIR was registered even before the Petitioner’s FIR and was deliberately engineered to neutralise the Petitioner’s complaint and falsely implicate the Petitioner and his family. It is further submitted that the Petitioner has serious and reasonable doubts regarding the genuineness of the medical documents relied upon in FIR No. 355/2026, particularly the alleged fracture of the right hand of Respondent No. 6. The Petitioner therefore 4 sought constitution of an independent Medical Board for fresh examination and X-ray of Respondent No. 6, at his own expense. Learned counsel further submits that there are serious allegations regarding the nexus between Respondent No. 6 and officials of Police Station Jutemill, which, according to the Petitioner, explains the persistent inaction on the family’s complaints and the manner in which the counter-case came to be registered. 4. It is lastly submitted that, despite representations to the Superintendent of Police, Inspector General of Police, Director General of Police and Principal Secretary, Home Department, no effective action has been taken. The Petitioner therefore seeks an independent and impartial investigation into FIR No. 355/2026, preferably by a Special Investigation Team comprising officers from outside District Raigarh or by the CID, Chhattisgarh, along with an independent Medical Board examination of Respondent No. 6. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the documents appended with writ petition. 6. Upon perusal of the pleadings and the contents of the FIRs, it appears that both FIRs are counter-versions arising out of the same incident. The Petitioner has lodged FIR bearing Crime No. 356/2026 against Respondent No. 6 and his associates, alleging assault, criminal intimidation and other acts committed against the Petitioner and his brother, whereas Respondent No. 6 has lodged 5 a counter-FIR bearing Crime No. 355/2026 against the Petitioner, his brother and his father in respect of the same occurrence. Both FIRs are presently pending investigation. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Investigating Officer, i.e., Respondent No. 5, is directed to conclude the investigation in both cases and submit the police report under Section 173(2) of the CrPC (now Section 193(3) of the BNSS) before the Magistrate concerned expeditiously, in accordance with law, if the investigation has not already been concluded, preferably within a period of six weeks from today. In the meanwhile, the Petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation. We hope and trust that the investigation in both cases shall be conducted fairly, impartially, and strictly in accordance with law. 8. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this order before the Investigating Officer within a period of one week from today. 9. With the aforesaid direction, the present petition stands disposed off. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu