Dismissed¶29

Shashi Kumar Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC16 Jul 2025CRMP/182/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR, challan and RCC (NIA No. 138) 5621/2022 (IPC); abuse of process of law; no prima facie case; Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Sections 34 and 120-B IPC; CISF RTC Bhilai complaint dated 21.11.2021; handwriting expert letter dated 27.04.2022; charges framed; two prosecution witnesses examined; trial in progress; refusal to interfere at trial stage; expeditious conclusion of trial; CRMP No. 182 of 2023; High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; decided 17.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

None; the petition was dismissed on the ground that charges were framed and trial in progress, with the Court expressing hope and trust that the learned trial Court shall conclude the trial expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. ¶29

Shashi Kumar Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR, challan and regular criminal case (NIA No. 138) 5621/2022 (IPC) pending against the petitioner before the JMFC, Durg should be quashed on the ground that the challan does not disclose any offence and the prosecution is an abuse of the process of law. +1 more

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The Court was not inclined to interfere in the matter at this stage, considering that charges had already been framed against the petitioner, two prosecution witnesses had already been examined by the learned trial Court, and the trial was in progress.

¶28

Key takeaways

The petition was dismissed on this ground alone, with an expression of hope and trust that the learned trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Division Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge; order per Ramesh Sinha, CJ), 17.07.2025, CRMP No. 182 of 2023: Petition seeking quashing of FIR, challan and regular criminal case (NIA No. 138) 5621/2022 (IPC) between State vs. Ramesh Kumar Yadav & Another, pending before the JMFC, Durg, alleging prosecution under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 and 120-B IPC (arising from a CISF RTC Bhilai complaint dated 21.11.2021) disclosed no offence and was an abuse of process. Dismissed on the sole ground that charges had already been framed and two prosecution witnesses had been examined, with trial in progress; the Court declined to interfere at that stage and expressed hope and trust that the trial Court would conclude the trial expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

2025:CGHC:33593-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRMP No. 182 of 2023

¶6

Shashi Kumar Yadav S/o Jangbahadur Singh, Aged About 28 Years R/o Pakhanpura, Police Station Bhawarkol, Tahsil Muhadabad, District Gajipur (U.P.)

¶7

... Petitioner(s) versus

¶8

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Durg, District - Durg Chhattisgarh

¶9

2. R. Ramesh Kumar Yadav S/o Kailash Yadav, Aged About 35 Years R/o Shakkarpur, Police Station Nonhara, Tahsil Muhdabad, District Gajipur (U.P.), Presently Residing At Cisf Rtc Utai, District - Durg Chhattisgarh

¶10

...Respondent(s)

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Preeti Yadav, Advocate. : For Respondent/State Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Sudeep Johri, Advocate.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶16

17.07.2025

¶17

Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN BRIJMOHAN MORLE MORLE Date: 2025.07.17 17:57:42 +0530

¶18

1. Heard Mr. H.B. Agrawal, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Preeti Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shailendra Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No. 1/State and Mr. Sudeep Johri, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 2.

¶19

¶20

2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:

¶21

“ It is, therefore, prayed that the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition by quashing FIR, challan and regular criminal case (NIA No. 138) 5621/2022 (IPC) between State vs. Ramesh Kumar Yadav & Another pending before Smt. Amrita Dinesh Mishra, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg, District Durg (C.G.), in the interest of justice. ”

¶22

3. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner submits that the Assistant Commandant (Administration) Central Industrial Security Force RTC, Bhilai has filed a complaint dated 21.11.2021 for registering FIR against the petitioner is based on presumption only, because all the bank statement of Ramesh Kumar goes to show that he has worked in Central Industrial Security Force and got payment of the work done, no documentary proof has been produced along with challan to prove the case against petitioner no preliminary enquiry papers has been seized by the Police as mentioned in complaint dated 25.11.2021, therefore, challan as it is do not disclose any tribal offence against the petitioner, therefore, registering FIR, filing challan and prosecuting the petitioner under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 and 120-B of the IPC is not made out. Hence, it is abuse the process of law and the same is liable to be quashed, because no prima facie case is made against the petitioner for trying the above said case.

¶23

4. It is further submitted by the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner that the Police has not filed any document from CISF Office, Bhilai either for getting preliminary enquiry or getting handwriting expert

¶24

¶25

report sent by Senior Superintendent of Police, Durg to State Examiner of disputed documents Police Headquarter, Raipur by letter dated 27.04.2022, therefore, challan as it is do not disclose any offence tribal against the petitioner, therefore, challan is liable to be quashed. Hence, this petition.

¶26

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 2 have pointed out that the charges have already been framed against the petitioner and two prosecution witnesses have already been examined by the learned trial Court and the trial is in progress.

¶27

6. We have perused the prayers and pleadings made in the petition along with the annexures annexed in this petition.

¶28

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case that the charges have already been framed against the petitioner and two prosecution witnesses have already been examined by the learned trial Court and the trial is in progress, therefore, at this stage, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter.

¶29

8. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed on this ground alone. However, we hope and trust that the learned trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

¶30

Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶31

Brijmohan

Shashi Kumar Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashi Kumar Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramakant @ Tingu Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Pappu Singh Rajput Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Tilak Ram Chouhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vinay Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lokesh Garg Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Alok Toppo Vs State of Chhattisgarh