Deep @ Ayush Sinha S/o Tribhuwan Prasad Sinha Aged About 30 Years R/o Sattipara v. 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya
Case Details
1 ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2025:CGHC:28984-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1822 of 2023 Deep @ Ayush Sinha S/o Tribhuwan Prasad Sinha Aged About 30 Years R/o Sattipara, Ambikapur, Dist. Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director General of Police Police Department Of Home Affairs, Head Quarter, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Inspector General of Police Surguja Range, District Surguja, Ambikapur, C.G. 4 - The Superintendent of Police District Surguja, Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Station House Officer Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), Dist. Surguja (C.G.) 6 - Dheerendranath Dubey Inspector, Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), Distt. Surguja (C.G.) 7 - Praveen Singh Constable, Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar) Distt. Surguja (C.G.) 8 - Jaydeep Singh Constable, Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), Distt. Surguja (C.G.)
Legal Reasoning
9 - Sonu Firdoshi Constable, Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), Distt. Surguja (C.G.) 2 10 - Shehbaj Khan Constable, Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), Distt. Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Neeraj Kumar Mehta, Advocate For Respondent Nos.1 to 5/ State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.6 : Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Advocate For Respondent Nos. 8,9 & 10 : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Decision
Order on Board 30.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. Neeraj Kumar Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Malay Jain, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondent Nos.1 to 5, Mr. Rishabh Gupta, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 6 and Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos. 8, 9 & 10. 2. The present petition under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers :- “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to: 1. allow this petition, 2. call for entire records from the respondent authorities concerned relating to registration of Crime No. 0182/2023, 3 3. quash the FIR dated 25/05/2023 bearing Crime No.0182 registered at Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinangar), District Ambikapur (Surguja), C.G. against the petitioner for offence punishable under Sections 7 & 8 of Chhattisgarh Gambling Prohibition Act, 2022, 4. to direct the Respondent No.01 to constitute Special Investigating Team (SIT) to investigate into the matter regarding the report made by the petitioner to the higher authorities, and submit report to the Hon'ble High Court for its kind perusal, 5. to direct the Respondent authorities concerned to give protection to the Petitioner to save his life and liberty from the illegal activities of the Police concerned, 6. to pass any other order / direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 3. Prosecution story, in brief, is that Respondent No.6 had lodged a report against the petitioner and other accused persons on 25/05/2023, alleging therein that an information received through informer that under the police station Gandhi Nagar area online and offline State level illegal widespread business of gambling on IPL match is being operated by one Tunna @ Mritunjay Singh in connivance with the co-accused persons namely Saurabh Mishra, Deep @ Ayush Sinha (Petitioner), Ravi Patel, Niraj Tigga, Hazari @ Sandeep and Ashu @ Akash Agrawal and they are encouraging the gaming slips (Satta Patti) in the area with the help of Sky Exchange Online Company. On the date of FIR i.e. on 4 25/05/2023, Ashu Agrawal and Arjun Yadav after collecting money from the local people, they were planning to handover the amount to Tunna @ Mrityunjay Singh. At that time, on information received, a raid was conducted and from Arjun Yadav and Akash Agrawal @ Ashu Gambling Slips, Mobile and cash were recovered. Hence, this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the lodging of the FIR is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the law applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. The Petitioner is innocent and falsely implicated in the instant case by the concerned respondents, there is no criminal background of the Petitioner. He further argued that the Petitioner herein before registration of FIR had moved an application before the Inspector General and Superintendent of Police, Surguja Ambikapur, stating therein that some of the police personnel have created illegal pressure upon him to run a Satta business and on being denied, threat is being extended to inculpate him in a false case like before and the petitioner has also received threats of running a case against him after 10-15 days of commencement of IPL match. The Petitioner had requested the authorities to save him from any false & fabricated criminal case, however, despite the applications moved by him before the Inspector General and Superintendent of Police, false FIR has been registered against the petitioner. He submitted that even-after registration of FIR, the Petitioner moved applications for making enquiry against the 5 police personnel for falsely registering the FIR against the Petitioner, however, despite that no action has been taken by the authorities. He also submitted that the FIR has been lodged with malafide intention only to harass the petitioner and to falsely implicate him in a false case as earlier he moved applications before the higher authorities of police against the private respondents, who are the police personnel. There is not a single iota of evidence available on record to show that the Petitioner was involved in the alleged crime. Only on the basis of the statement of the co-accused persons, the Petitioner has been arrayed / made an accused in the alleged crime only in order to take revenge from the Petitioner, the Police personnel roped him in the present crime. Hence, he prayed that the instant FIR filed against the petitioner be quashed and to direct the Respondent No.01 to constitute Special Investigating Team (SIT) to investigate into the matter regarding the report made by the petitioner to the higher authorities and submit report before this Court. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer and submitted that once the FIR has been registered, it has to be investigated and taken to its logical end. Thus, at this stage, no interference is warranted in view of the judgment of the Apex Court passed in Criminal Appeal No. 330 of 2021 (M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & others) and therefore, the present petition is liable to be dismissed. 6 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 7. In Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Apex Court has observed that the power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection in the rarest of rare cases. While examining an F.I.R./complaint, quashing of which is sought, the Court cannot inquire about the reliability, genuineness, or otherwise of the allegations made in the F.I.R./complaint. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very wide, but conferment of wide power requires the Court to be cautious. The Apex Court has emphasized that though the Court has the power to quash the F.I.R. in suitable cases, the Court, when it exercises power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether or not the allegations of F.I.R. disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and is not required to consider the case on merit. 8. From perusal of the contents of the FIR and materials available on record, it transpires that till date no interim order has been passed in the instant case and the impugned FIR has been registered against the petitioner along with other co-accused persons alleging that they are encouraging the gaming slips (Satta Patti) in the area with the help of Sky Exchange Online Company. 9. After having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., prima facie it cannot be said that no cognizable offence has been disclosed against the petitioner, hence, no 7 interference is called for by this Court in its inherent power under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing of the F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner and also in view of the law laid down by the Apex court in M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the present petition is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra