Vinay Rajput S/o Shri Parkhat Singh, Aged About 21 Years R/o Near Gayatri Mandir v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Throug
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:39044-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2025.08.06 17:51:36 +0530 WPCR No. 446 of 2025 Vinay Rajput S/o Shri Parkhat Singh, Aged About 21 Years R/o Near Gayatri Mandir, Naya Mangal Bazar, Gudhiyari, Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Through Parkhat Singh, S/o Kapil Singh, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Near Gayatri Mandir, Naya Mangal Bazar, Gudhiyari, Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - The Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Sector-19, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - The Inspector General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Sector-19, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - The Superintendent Of Police, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 5 - The City Superintendent Of Police, Urla, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 6 - The Deputy Superintendent Of Police And Public Information Officer, Traffic Police Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 7 - The Station House Officer, Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 8 - The Station House Officer, Police Station Ganj, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 9 - The Station House Officer, Police Station Anti Crime And Cyber Unit, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 10 - Atulesh Rai, Sub Inspector, Anti Crime And Cyber Unit, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 11 - Pramod Vatti, Head Constable, Anti Crime And Cyber Unit, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 12 - Vikas Kahatri, Constable, Anti Crime And Cyber Unit, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 13 - Manoj Singh, Constable, Anti Crime And Cyber Unit, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 14 - Keshav Sinha, Constable, Police Station Khamtarai, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 15 - Yogesh Dubey, Constable, Batch No. 1112, Police Station Khamtarai, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 16 - Akshay Dinkar, Constable, Batch No. 839, Police Station Khamtarai, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 17 - Mohit Verma, Constable, Batch No. 2760, Police Station Khamtarai, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents For Petitioner
Legal Reasoning
: Mr.Ravikar Patel, Advocate For Respondents : Mr.S.S.Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate No.1 to 9/State Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 6.8.2025 1. Heard Mr.Ravikar Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr.S.S.Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate 3 appearing for respondents No.1 to 9/State. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers :- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire record and CCTV footages related to this crime number for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ(s), order(s), direction(s) for quashing the FIR No. 415/2025 dated 07.05.2025 registered at Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.) to the extent it relates to the petitioner. 10.3 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct to the State for grant of monetary compensation to the petitioner for his illegal arrest. 10.4 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the State to prosecute the police personnel, who are involved in this false investigation. 10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief to the petitioner which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit & appropriate as per the facts & circumstances of the present case.” 3. Facts of the case are that Police Station Khamtarai, Raipur (C.G.) lodged an FIR in Section 21(C) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 bearing FIR No. 415/2025 at about 15:29 hours, dated 07.05.2025 alleging that they arrested 4 the petitioner and two other persons from the Main Road, in front of Khamtarai Police Station with total 120 banned Narcotics Syrup. The clause-3(a) of FIR, it is categorically mentioned, the place, time & date of the occurrence of offence. Copy of the FIR No. 415/2025 dated 07.05.2025 is filed herewith as Annexure P/1, but the joint team of Police and Anti Crime & Cyber Unit Raipur had catched the petitioner before the date of FIR i.e. 06.05.2025 at Near Durga Mandir, Main Road Shrinagar, Raipur at about 13:45 hours, which is 4 to 5 kilometer away from the Police Station Ganj and Police Station Khamtarai. In the FIR, the police mentioned that they got information from the police informer and they constitute a police team in Khamtarai Police Station with government vehicle Bolero bearing No. CG 03 A- 0273 and going to the checking of persons in Main Road of Bhanpuri-Raipur. 4. The police officers suddenly seen that some persons who are in motorcycle and scooty coming from Bhanpur to Raipur in Main Road. Thereafter, police personnels stopped them in front of Police Station Khamtarai and on checking their motorcycle and scooty, the police found that they were travelled with 120 bottles Narcotic Syrup, so the police asked to produce the valid documents of the banned Narcotics Syrup, but the petitioner cannot show any documents. The police arrested them and made a seizure memo from all three persons. In the FIR, it is mentioned that on the spot, 29 bottles from Ravi Tamer, 40 bottles from 5 Rakesh Pancheshwar, which was seized from motorcycle and 41 bottles from present petitioner, which was seized from Activa bearing No. CG 04 NB 5699 and police arrested all three persons and sent to the jail. 5. On the information of police, the parents of the present petitioner went to the Police Station Ganj for getting information about the present petitioner. When the present petitioner was in the lockup of Ganj Police Station, he told to his parents that police falsely arrested the present petitioner and he told that the place of the arrest, there are several CCTV camera mounted in various shops, so they went to the shops and collected the CCTV footage of the time of arrest. On information by the petitioner, the parents of the petitioner went to the shops, near Durga Mandir, Shrinagar, Raipur. One Cycle Repairing Shop which was in the exact location of the arrest from the police. The CCTV mounted the Cycle Repairing Shop capture the all scene of arrest by the police. The footage of the CCTV clearly indicates that the time and date of arrest i.e. 06.05.2025 at about 13:45 hours. The Police Officer Vikas Kshatri and other police officers suddenly captured the present petitioner without any narcotic drugs and manhanded the petitioner, thereafter they took him from Shrinagar and lockup in Ganj Police Station. At the time of arrest, one police officer come to the Activa, which was parked in front of Cycle Repairing Shop and opened the dicky of the Activa of the petitioner bearing No. CG 04 NB 5699, but nothing was founded in the dicky. Video 6 footage of CCTV in Pen Drive, is filed herewith as Annexure P/2. 6. The police personnel took the petitioner and locked up in Police Station Ganj at 2:00 PM on 06.05.2025 and thereafter, police personnel again took the petitioner and went to Khamtarai Police Station at about 11:00 PM on 06.05.2025. At 11:00 PM of 06.05.2025 to 07.05.2025, the petitioner remained locked up in Khamtarai Police Station, so how could police capture the petitioner from Main Road, in front of Khamtarai Police Station. It is clear that the entire case against the petitioner is a made up case. For the kind perusal of the Court, petitioner submits a photo in front of Khamtarai Police Station. The Khamtarai Police Station is situated at a very closed area at Main Road, Bhanpuri. Copies of the colour photographs in front of Khamtarai Police Station are collectively filed herewith as Annexure P/3. 7. The parents of the petitioner filed a application under the Right to Information Act through his Advocate for getting the information of the CCTV cameras, which was mounted at Khamtarai Police Station, Ganj Police Station and Traffic CCTVs, but the information was not given by the respondent authorities. It is clear that the police lodged false FIR against the petitioner and does not want to give any information regarding the petitioner CCTV footage. Copies of RTI application dated 05.06.2025 are collectively filed herewith as Annexure P/4. 8. On 11.06.2025, the Public Information Officer, Deputy 7 Superintendent of Traffic, replied the application of RTI and mentioned that the video footage of CCTV cameras are deleted, so the video footage of the CCTV cameras cannot be given to the petitioner. Copy of the reply dated 11.06.2025 is filed herewith as Annexure P/5. On 06.07.2025 & 07.07.2025, the Public Information Officer and Station House Officer, Police Station Khamtarai replied the RTI application and stated various reasons the CCTV footage of the Khamtarai Police Station cannot give to the applicant. Copies of the reply dated 06.07.2025 & 07.07.2025 are collectively filed herewith as Annexure P/6. 9. The petitioner and his vehicle Activa reached Police Station Khamtarai at 11:00 PM on 06.05.2025, if the Police Station give the CCVT footage of the Police Station, it could be clearly seen that the police had arrested the petitioner one day before of the date of occurrence of the offence. the petitioner is fully innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and the seizure from the present petitioner is also a false seizure, so the FIR and seizure against the petitioner is fully made up by the police personnel. Section 105 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 clearly prescribes that the audio-video recording of the seizure & search and it is also mandatory that the video recording of seizure is sent to the Judicial Magistrate, but the police does not take any video recording of the seizure. The FIR No. 415/2025 (Annexure P/1) registered at Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.) and seizure & charge sheet against the petitioner, 8 therefore, liable to be quashed by this Hon'ble Court. Hence, this petition. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the total case registered against the petitioner is totally made up case and police has falsely implicated the present petitioner in the present case. The petitioner arrested one day before the lodging of FIR, so how can seizure is made out from the petitioner. He further submits that the police personnels separately arrested all of the accused and lodged FIR jointly and made story against the petitioner and other accused, which is totally illegal. He also submits that the procedure of the police in this case, is also a violation of section 105 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. As such, the petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned FIR deserves to be set aside. 11. On the other hand, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for respondents No.1 to 9/State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that as per FIR, 41 bottles of each containing 100 ml of contraband article was seized from the petitioner, an activa was also seized in which he was carrying the bottles. Apart from the present petitioner, there are two other co-accused persons who were travelling with motor-cycle and they were arrested and total quantity was above the commercial quantity. As such, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 9 12. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the FIR and other documents appended with writ petition. 13. From perusal of the FIR, it transpires that after conducting a search, a search panchnama was prepared in the presence of witnesses for suspects Ravi Tamer, Rakesh Pancheshwar and Vinay Singh Rajput (petitioner herein) and the suspects were searched separately. On checking khakhi colour carton pack kept in motorcycle CG 04 LG / 6169 and trunk of Activa No.CG 04 NB/5699 in their possession, a huge quantity of narcotic syrup was recovered, 39 bottles from the possession of accused Ravi Tamer, 40 bottles from the possession of accused Rakesh Pancheshwar and 41 bottles kept inside a while plastic bag in the possession of motorcycle No.04 LG/6169 and petitioner Vinay Singh Rajput and in the trunk of the activa, totalling 120 bottles of banned narcotic syrup were recovered and a recovery panchnama was prepared. Later, the witnesses present on the spot were asked to identify the recovered narcotic syrup. On seeing the syrup, it was identified to be banned narcotic syrup and an identification panchnama was prepared. Later, separate notices under Section 94 BNSS were issued to the suspects to produce valid documents in relation to the possession of the said banned narcotic syrup, but they did not produce any documents on the spot. 14. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the 10 parties, further considering the contents of the FIR and also considering the fact that the matter is under investigation and quantity of the contraband article, we do not find any scope for interference in this petition.
Decision
15. Accordingly, the writ petition being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Bablu