1 2026:CGHC:6186 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 348 of 2026 1 - Manoj Jaiswal S/o Firatram Jaiswal, Aged About 26 Years, R/o - Village - Kateli, Police Station And Tahsil - Sarangarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh. Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer- In-Charge Police Station - Sarangarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sandhya Jaiswal W/o Manoj Jaiswal Aged About 24 Years R/o Fuljhariya Para Ward No.12, Sarangarh, District - Sarangarh- Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh. (Complainant) ... Respondents For Applicant : Mr. Devesh G. Kela, Advocate For State : Mr. Afroz Khan, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 04/02/2026 1. This Criminal Petition under section 528 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed against the order dated 17.11.2025 passed by the Addition Sessions Judge, FTC (POCSO Act) Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Sessions Bench Raigarh (CG) in Criminal Revision No. 29/2025, affirming the order dated 24.07.2025, passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sarangarh (C.G.), whereby charge under Section 85 and 88 of the BNS has been framed against the petitioner. 2 2. As per the prosecution case, respondent No. 2 (the complainant/wife) filed a written complaint on 02.09.2024 alleging that after her marriage on 18.04.2024, she was subjected to physical and mental harassment by her husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law, sister-in-law, and brother-in-law over dowry demands. Upon informing them of her pregnancy on 14.07.2024, they expressed unwillingness to have a child and attempted to get her aborted. They administered a substance on her tea on 18.07.2024 and 19.07.2024, causing abdominal pain. When her husband didn't return home on 19.07.2024, her in-laws abused her, stating she would be responsible for his absence. Her in-laws reiterated that if she aborted the pregnancy, her husband would return home. Her father then took her back to her parental home. Based on the complaint, a case was registered against the petitioner and his family members for the aforesaid offenses. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge framed against the petitioner under Sections 85 and 88 of the BNS is baseless, and the trial Court has erred in framing the charge, which was wrongly affirmed by the Revisional Court. He further submits that the query report of Dr. Malti Kumari, Gynecologist, dated 07.10.2024, reveals that respondent No. 2 stated she had taken abortion medicines voluntarily. Additionally, the complainant's statement in the FIR that she doesn't have the habit of taking tea is contradicted by the allegation that she was administered a substance to abort her pregnancy by mixing it in the tea, which indicates falsehood in her allegations. He also submits that photographs attached with the petition show respondent No. 2 was happy in her matrimonial home, yet false allegations of dowry demand and cruelty have been made against the petitioner and his family. He has relied on a decision rendered in the matter of Rukmini Narvekar Vs. Vijaya Satardekar and Ors. (2008) 14 SCC 1. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and supports the impugned order. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record with utmost circumspection. 3 6. As per the charge-sheet and the documents annexed thereto, it is clear that the petitioner was used to harass the respondent No. 2 on demand of dowry and on 18.07.2024, the pregnancy of respondent No. 2 has been aborted by the petitioner by giving some medicine in her tea forcefully. As such, there is a sufficient material and evidence available on record for which the petitioner has been charged. 7. As after going through the charge sheet, the documents annexed thereto including the impugned orders passed by learned Revisional Court and the trial Court, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders warranting no interference. 8. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed at the motion stage itself. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Sourabh P.