SMT. MONA GUPTA (NOW SAHU) v. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
CRMP/1940/2024 · 2026-04-29
Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9667 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9667 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2026:CGHC:20111-DB
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1940 of 2024 1 - Smt. Mona Gupta (Now Sahu) W/o Shri Vinod Kumar Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o Kalyanpur, Akaltara, Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh, At Present resided R/o Police Colony, Amlidih, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Nanad Of The Complainant) 2 - Smt. Asha Gupta W/o Murari Prasad Gupta Aged About 55 Years R/o Tikrapara, Sitapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh (Mother-In-Law Of The Complainant) 3 - Nishant Gupta S/o Shri Murari Prasad Gupta Aged About 29 Years R/o Tikrapara, Sitapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh (Husband Of The Complainant)
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Urga, District Korba, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Chanchal Sahu W/o Nishant Gupta Aged About 23 Years R/o Madwarani, Police Station Urga, Tahsil Kartala, District Korba, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s) (Cause Title Taken From Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Neeraj Mehta, Advocate. For Respondent No. 1/State Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Deputy Government Advocate For Respondent No. 2/ Complainant : Ms. Priyanka Rai, Advocate.
2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble
Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal,
Judge
Judgment on Board Per
Ramesh Sinha,
Chief Justice
30/04/2026
1. Heard Mr. Neeraj Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. Vishali Mahilong, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State/respondent No. 1 as well as Ms. Priyanka Rai, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/complainant.
2. By this petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioners seek quashing of the FIR bearing Crime No. 42/2024 dated 03.02.2024, registered at Police Station, Urga, District Korba, for the offences punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the IPC).
3.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the marriage between petitioner No. 3 and the respondent No.2 was solemnized as per the Hindu customs and rituals on 01.12.2021 and from the said wedlock, a girl child, which, at present is aged about 3 years, was born. The petitioners No. 1 is the Nanad, and petitioner No. 2 is the mother-in-law of the respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 lodged an FIR against the petitioners alleging that she was mentally and physically harassed on the ground of bringing less dowry. Accordingly, FIR bearing Crime No. 42/2024 was registered by the Police of Police Station, Urga, District Korba, for the offences under Sections 498-A and 34 of the IPC.
4. Mr. Neeraj Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that this Court, vide order dated 24.07.2024 had directed the parties to appear before the High Court Mediation Centre, to explore the possibilities of amicable settlement, however, the mediation proceedings failed on 09.08.2024. Mr. Mehta further submits that after failure of the mediation proceedings, the parties
3 i.e. the petitioner No. 3 as well as the respondent No. 2 have entered into an amicable settlement on 09.03.2026 (Annexure P/11) and have agreed to withdraw all the proceedings filed against each other, and as such, in view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, the present petition be allowed and the FIR in question be quashed.
5.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 does not controvert the above submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the record, including the pleadings, the reliefs sought, and the documents placed on file.
7. In view of the submissions advanced and considering the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, we deem it appropriate to direct the parties to appear before the concerned Investigating Officer, who shall verify the settlement agreement / compromise dated 09.03.2026, and submit a police report before the trial Court concerned, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from today. The Superintendent of Police concerned shall ensure that the police report is submitted strictly in accordance with law. Till then, the interim order passed by this Court on 24.07.2024 shall continue.
8. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed off in terms of the directions contained hereinabove. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2026.05.02 12:01:22 +0530