1 2026:CGHC:6957-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 82 of 2026 1 - Nadamuni Ravi S/o Shri Nadamuni Janardhan Rao, Aged About 34 Years Ex CEO M/s Gananayak Cars Private Ltd., Raipur (C.G.) R/o Near Tagore School, Jhanda Chowk, Shivanand Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Law and Legislative Affairs, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar (C.G.) 2 - Station House Officer, Police Station Amanaka, District Raipur C.G. 3 - Superintendent of Police, District Raipur C.G. 4 - Director General of Police, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur C.G. 5 - Sunil Madhyani S/o Late Shri Pratap Madhyani, Aged About 37 Years Managing Director M/s Gananayak Cars Private Ltd., Raipur (C.G.) R/o 31/23, Malviya Nagar, Hotel 4 Season, Ward No. 23, Durg, District Durg C.G. ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : None. For State-Respondents : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Digitally signed by MOHAMMED AADIL KHAN Date: 2026.02.10 14:48:13 +0530 2 Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 09-02-2026 1. Heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents-State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- “i. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent Authorities to register a FIR against the respondent no. 05 and other concerned person unbiasedly on the complaint of the petitioner. ii. Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. iii. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioners, in the interest of justice.” 3. As none appears for the petitioner to press this petition when the matter is taken up for hearing, we are inclined to dismiss the same for want of prosecution. 4. Later on, Mr. Ankit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has appeared and prays for hearing of the petition. 5. Heard on the petition. 3 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after lapse of more than 2 and half months, no action has been taken by the respondents No.2 and 3 on the complaint made by the petitioner. 7. Learned State counsel has submitted that the grievance of the petitioner can be very well redressed before the Court below by filing an application under Section 156 (3) or under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. (now, under Section 175(3) or under Section 223 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). He further submits that the controversy involved in the present matter has already been decided by the High Court of Allahabad in Misc. Bench No. 24492 of 2020 : Waseem Haider Vs. State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home Others vide judgment and order dated 14.12.2020 as well as by this Court in WPCR No.333 of 2020 (Akhilesh Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) decided on 12.04.2023, dismissing the said petition, hence, the present petition be also dismissed in terms of the said order. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy before appropriate Forum. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Aadil