1 2026:CGHC:11583-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 136 of 2026 1 - Khilawan Prasad Chandrakar S/o Late Ubhay Chandrakar Aged About 53 Years R/o Ward No.19, Budhpara, Doundi - Lohara, Tahsil - Doundi-Lohara, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Mohan Nishad S/o Late Mohtri Nishad Aged About 47 Years R/o Ward No. 03, Old Bus Stand, Doundi - Lohara, Tahsil - Doundi-Lohara, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh S.H.O. - Doundi - Lohara, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Maniram Taram S/o Late Banauram Taram Aged About 55 Years Posted As Assistant Engineer, C.S.P.D.C.L., Sub-Division- Doundi - Lohara,district - Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.03.12 10:49:41 +0530 2 11.03.2026 1. Heard Mr. Hemant Gupta, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent No. 1 / State. 2. The petitioners have filed this petition praying for following relief:- “I This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue order/orders, writ / writs and direction / directions & may quashed the impugned F.I.R. no 35/2026 dated 10-02-2026 registered at P.S. Doundi-Lohara, u/s Section - 3(5), 308(2), 351(2), of B.N.S. & Sec. 3(1) r of Sc/St act 1989, against the petitioners. II Any other relief/relief's, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner.” 3. From a perusal of the present CRMP, it is evident that the same has been drafted in a vague and sketchy manner without properly mentioning the name of the Act i.e. The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and without using proper font, reflecting a casual approach and resulting in unnecessary consumption of the valuable time of this Court. 4. In view of the same, learned counsel for the petitioners prays to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file afresh. 3 5. At this stage, this Court proposed to impose a cost of Rs. 5,000/- upon the petitioners for filing the present petition in such a casual and defective manner. Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, prayed for waiver/reduction of the said cost and submitted that the defect occurred inadvertently. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court deems it appropriate to reduce the cost from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 2,500/-. 6. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to file the petition afresh, subject to depositing a sum of Rs. 2,500/- as cost by the petitioners in the Registry of this Court and the same shall be transmitted to the Government Multi Handicapped Special School, Bagbahra, District–Mahasamund (C.G.), for wasting the precious time of this Court. 7. Certified copy of the documents annexed in the petition, if any, may be returned back to the counsel for the petitioner after obtaining the photocopy of the same, subject to deposit of the fine amount. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet