Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:20176-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 952 of 2022 Praveen Bhagat S/o, Shri Pradeep Bhagat, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Bhagatpara, Pakur, P.S. Pakur Town, District Pakur, (Jharkhand). ... Petitioner versus 1 – State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mahila Thana Ambikapour, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. 2 - Priyanka Lakra D/o Late Kamal Sai Lakra, Aged About 31 Years R/o Sitapur, P/s Sitapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh, Present Address Namanakala, Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioner :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Sajal Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma , Judge Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Decision
Order on Board 02.05.2025 ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.05.05 18:17:00 +0530 2 1. Heard Mr. Sajal Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Malay Jain, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No. 1/State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the charge-sheet dt. 11.03.2022, filed before Learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Ambikapur (C.G.), vide charge-sheet no.11/2022 in Crime No.01/2022 and further quash the Special Sessions Case no.13/2022 pending before Special Sessions Judge (Atrocities) Ambikapur District- Sarguja., in the interest of justice.” 3. Prosecution case in brief is that the petitioner and the complainant got introduced through Facebook in the year 2018 thereafter in the year 2019 the complainant met the petitioner for the first time at Kolkata where she was getting her mother treated. It has been alleged that in the month of September, 2020 the petitioner made sexual relation with the vicitm at Manas Hotel on the pretext of marriage and since then he has been making forcible sexual relation with the victim and has refused to keep his promise regarding marriage. Thereafter, an FIR was lodged by the complainant by way of written complaint dated 04/01/2022 at Police Station Mahila Thana Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. Pursuant to the said FIR, the petitioner was 3 arrested on 14/02/2022 by the police of concerned police station for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC, Section3 (2) (v) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the petitioner has been granted bail by this Court on 28/04/2022. Hence the instant petition has been filed with the prayer as aforesaid. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the victim is a lady aged about 31 years and the petitioner and the victim were having love affair, hence, she is the consenting party. It is further submitted that there is delay in lodging the FIR which shows that the instant FIR has been filed with malafide intentions and ulterior motives. He also submits that this Court vide order dated 28/04/2022 granted bail to the petitioner in CRA No.526 of 2022. He placed his reliance on the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Sonu alias Subhash Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another {(2021) 18 SCC 517} and would pray that the entire FIR as well as charge-sheet are liable to be quashed. 5. On the other, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the investigation has been done strictly in accordance with law and after completion of investigation the final report/charge-sheet has been filed before the trial Court and the trial is in progress. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal 4 proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases and Courts should not ordinarily interfere with the investigations of cognizable offences. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the FIR or the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS or under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 8. In the present case, admittedly, after completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner and the learned trial Court has taken cognizance of the evidences and upon finding prima facie evidence regarding commission of offences the trial has been initiated against the petitioner. 9. Further, in the present case, from the perusal of the charge-sheet it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out and further, it appears to be a case of sexual exploitation on the pretext of marriage. Thus, the present petition does not fall in any of such category, wherein, this Court can exercise jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash the impugned FIR as well as charge-sheet. 10. The Judgment of Sonu alias Subhash Kumar (supra) which has been relied upon by the petitioner is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case and it is distinguishable as in the FIR 5 it has been alleged that the petitioner established relationship on the pretext of marriage, which goes to show that at its inception the allegation was leveled by the victim and the petitioner did not marry and established relationship form the year 2020. 11. In view of the above, we do not find it a fit case to quash the charge-sheet bearing dated 11.03.2022 filed before the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Ambikapur (C.G.) vide charge-sheet no.11/2022 in Crime No.01/2022 and the consequential criminal proceedings bearing Special Sessions Case No. 13/2022 pending before the trial Court, as such, this petition is dismissed. 12. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court for necessary information. 13. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ashu