1 CGHC010324102026 2026:CGHC:37498-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2205 of 2026 1 - Bhushan Pratap Patel S/o Krishna Lal Patel, Aged About 39 Years Village Udaipur, Tehsil Udaypur, District - Surguja, (C.G.) 2 - Krishna Lal Patel S/o Late Shri Darasram Patel, Aged About 70 Years R/o - Near Mela Ground, Katghora, P. S. - Katghora, Tehsil - Katghora, District - Korba (C.G.) 3 - Yashodha Patel W/o Krishna Lal Patel, Aged About 68 Years R/o - Near Mela Ground, Katghora, P. S. - Katghora, Tehsil - Katghora, District - Korba (C.G.) 4 - Savita Patel S/o Dev Prasad, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Sarwamangla Nagar, Durpa, P. S. Kusmunda, Tehsil - Katghora, District - Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police of P. S. - Katghora, District - Korba (C.G.) 2 - Asha Patel W/o Bhushan Pratap Patel, Aged About 34 Years R/o - H. No. 249/1, R. B. H. Colony, In Front of D R M Office, Khamtarai, P. S. Khamtarai, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent No.1 /State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 21.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. Achyut Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent No.1. ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 528 of the Bharariya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the following prayer :- “It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and kindly set aside/ quash the F.I.R. / Crime No. 77/2021 registered on dated 19.03.2021 at P.S. - Katghora, District – Korba (C.G.), the charge-sheet filed against the petitioners’ u/s 498A, 34 of IPC, cognizance order dated 12.04.2021, charges framed order dated 29.07.2022 and the proceedings of criminal case no. 783/2021 pending before JMFC, Katghora, District – Korba (C.G.) against the petitioners, in the interest of justice.” 3. The present petition arises out of a matrimonial dispute between Petitioner No. 1, Bhushan Patel, and Respondent No. 2, Asha Patel, who were married on 01.07.2009 at Shiv Mandir, Pali, District Korba (C.G.), in accordance with Hindu rites and customs. The marriage was a love marriage, and out of the wedlock, two daughters were born. As per the prosecution case, after marriage, Respondent No. 2 was subjected to physical and mental cruelty by Petitioner No. 1, his parents (Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3), and his elder sister (Petitioner No. 4). It is alleged that she was abused, assaulted and harassed, including on the ground of her belonging to a Scheduled Caste. It is further alleged that Petitioner No. 1, particularly after consuming alcohol, used to assault and abuse her, and that due to the continuous harassment and cruelty, she consumed phenol on 10.01.2021 and was admitted to District 3 Hospital, Raigarh (C.G.). Thereafter, the complainant alleged that the acts of cruelty and harassment continued and that despite attempts at reconciliation and family counselling, the petitioners did not take her back to the matrimonial home. 4. On completion of investigation, Respondent No.1 filed the charge- sheet against the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 34 of the IPC before the learned Trial Court on 12.04.2021. The learned Trial Court thereafter framed charges against the petitioners on 29.07.2022, and the matter was fixed for recording of prosecution evidence from 16.09.2022. However, despite the passage of considerable time, the trial has not progressed substantially and, out of the total seven prosecution witnesses cited by the prosecution, only one prosecution witness has been examined till date. The remaining prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. The present petition is, therefore, being preferred, inter alia, on the ground of prolonged pendency of the criminal proceedings and the consequent prejudice caused to the petitioners. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that allegations made by the Respondent No.2 are general, omnibus and substantially identical against the husband, is parents and his elder sister, without attributing specific and distinct acts of cruelty to each of the petitioners. He further submits that the charge-sheet was filed before the learned Trial Court on 12.04.2021 and charges were framed on 29.07.2022. Thereafter, the matter was fixed for 4 recording of prosecution evidence from 16.09.2022; however, despite the lapse of a considerable period, the trial has not progressed substantially. He further submits that, as per instructions, out of the total seven prosecution witnesses cited by the prosecution, only one prosecution witness has been examined till date, while the remaining six witnesses are yet to be examined. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioners have been facing the criminal proceedings for a prolonged period and the trial remains at a nascent stage. 6. Learned State counsel, while opposing the petition, submits that the prosecution has already commenced its evidence and that, out of the total seven prosecution witnesses, one witness has been examined before the learned Trial Court. It is further submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners are matters of evidence and cannot be adjudicated upon at this stage. 7. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and having perused the material available on record, this Court finds that the charge-sheet was filed on 12.04.2021, charges were framed by the learned Trial Court on 29.07.2022, and the matter was thereafter fixed for recording of prosecution evidence. 8. It is not in dispute that the trial has already commenced and, out of the total seven prosecution witnesses cited by the prosecution, one prosecution witness has already been examined. Thus, the proceedings are not at a stage where it can be said that the trial 5 has not commenced or that there has been no progress whatsoever. Though learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out the prolonged pendency of the proceedings and the fact that six prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined, having regard to the stage of the trial, this Court is not inclined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction for quashing the proceedings on the ground of delay. 9. Consequently, the present petition, being devoid of merit, is dismissed. 10. However, considering the fact that the petitioners have been facing the criminal proceedings for a considerable period and that the trial has already commenced, it is directed that the learned Trial Court shall make all endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of four months from today, subject to the cooperation of the parties and without granting unnecessary adjournments. 11. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the allegations or the evidence of the parties, and the learned Trial Court shall decide the case strictly in accordance with law and on the basis of the evidence available before it. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra