Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:8600 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1715 of 2022 Chandrashekhar Verma S/o Late Shri Yadoram Verma Aged About 47 Years Permanent R/o Village- Kukda, Police Station And Post- Palari, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh Present Address- Ward No. 7, Beside Neeraj Computers, Karmachari Colony, Main Road, Simga, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh Versus ... Petitioner(s) 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Simga, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh
Legal Reasoning
death and further from perusal of the materials on record, prima facie involvement of the petitioner in the offence in question is made out, and further the fact that since the trial is in progress and half of the prosecution witnesses have already been examined, we do not find it a fit case where this Court should exercise its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and quash the FIR or the criminal proceedings pending before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatapara, Resultantly, this petition stands dismissed leaving it open to the trial Court concerned to conclude the trial expeditiously. 9 The Registrar (Judicial) is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information, forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.02.21 19:13:13 +0530
Arguments
2 - Smt. Ganga Sonkar Wd/o Late Pappu Prasad Sonkar Aged About 32 Years R/o Sonkar Para, In Front Of Mahamaya Mandir, Police Station- Simga, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 19/02/2025 1 By this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR bearing Crime No. 370/2021 registered at Police Station, Simga, District Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara, alongwith the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 866/2021 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Simga and Sessions Case No.42/2021 before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatapara, 2 District Balodabazar for the offences under Sections 302/109, 201 and 212of the Indian Penal Code. 2 The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioner are on 15.08.2021 the complainant namely Smt. Ganga Sonkar lodged an FIR bearing Crime No. 370/2021, at Police Station Simga. District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, against an unknown person stating that her husband has been murdered. During investigation, on the basis of evidences collected by the police, it was found that in the intervening night of 14.08.2021 the watchman namely Kheluram Nishad and his wife, who used to live in a farm house of Patwari Chandrashekhar Verma, petitioner herein, have murdered Pappu Sonkar inside their room in the farm house, because Pappu Sonkar had evil eyes towards the watchman's wife. It is also the case of the prosecution that once, when watchman Kheluram had intimated such act of the Pappu Sonkar to the petitioner, he has said that if Pappu now repeats the same he may kill him and he (the petitioner) would take care of him. This alleged act of the petitioner has been projected as abetment to Kheluram to murder Pappu Sonkar. Allegedly, next morning at about 9:00 am after the incident, the watchman called the petitioner and told about the incident and the petitioner advised them to come in his residential house after cleaning the blood stains. It is further alleged that the petitioner had harbored them in his house from 15.08.2021 till 20.08.2021. It is also alleged that the petitioner also tried to clean the blood stains with a mopping cloth and later threw the cloth on rooftop of the farm house, which was recovered by the Police but not on the basis of petitioner's memorandum under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, but much prior to it. Later on, it came in knowledge of the police that Kheluram and his wife, in order to save themselves from the penal action, have committed suicide in village Kaneri within area of Police Station Chakarbhata. The petitioner was arrested by the police of Police Station 3 Simga on 24.10.2021 in relation to FIR No. 370/2021 of Police Station Sımga, Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara, for the offences under Sections 302, 201 and 212 of IPC. Thereafter, charge sheet was submitted before Judicial Magistrate First Class Simga, Balodabazar which was registered as Criminal Case No. 866/2021 which was thereafter committed to the Court of Additional Session Judge, Bhatapara and was registered as Sessions Case No. 42/2021. During trial, Section 109 of IPC was also added and at present, the petitioner, presently, is being tried for the offences under Sections 302/109, 201 and 212 of IPC. 3 Mr. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been granted regular bail by this Court on 14.03.2022 in M.Cr.C. No. 437/2022. It is further submitted that the criminal proceeding initiated against the petitioner suffers from serious infirmity of law and fact and is patently illegal and contrary to the law on the subject. Merely on the basis of alleged telephonic conversation and call records, it cannot be presumed that the petitioner has committed the offence. In fact, the main accused in this case have already committed suicide and there is no material on record to show that the petitioner is guilty of the offences as stated above and as such, the entire criminal proceedings against the petitioner deserves to be quashed. 4 On the other hand, Mr. S.S.Baghel, learned counsel for the State/ respondent submits that there is ample evidence on record to show that there is active involvement of the petitioner also in the act of defrauding the Court of law and as such, this petition deserves to be dismissed. 5 We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and materials available on record. 6 On a pointed query being made by this Court as to what is the stage of the trial, it has been informed by Mr. Shrivastava that out of 36 4 prosecution witnesses, the evidence of 16 witnesses have been recorded. The FIR was lodged on 15.08.2021 and the investigation concluded on 09.12.2021 when the final report was submitted in the Court of JMFC, Simga which was later on committed to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatapara vide order dated 15.12.2021. Thereafter, the Sessions Trial has begun and out of 36 prosecution witnesses, 16 have been examined and the trial is in progress. This petition was filed on 30.09.2022 and there has been no interim order passed in this case. The petitioner is already on bail. 7 The legal position on the issue of quashing of FIR or criminal 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. The Courts should not ordinarily interfere with the investigations of cognizable offences. 8 Looking to the nature of offence alleged where a person has been done to