Keshav Das Nagwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:55756-DB

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRMP No. 3459 of 2025

¶6

1. Keshav Das Nagwani S/o Arjun Das Nagwani Aged About 62 Years R/o Amlidih Shri Ji Vaishali, P/s New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

2. Prakash Rathore S/o Manoj Rathore Aged About 25 Years R/o S3, Farishta Complex, Rajbandha Maidan, P/s Moudhapara, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

3. Navin Khatri S/o Keshav Lal Khatri Aged About 38 Years R/o House No. 39, Sector 2, Anand Vihar, P/s Telibandha, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

4. Kamesh Rao S/o Ishwar Rao Aged About 29 Years R/o Janta Colony, Quarter No. 348, P/s Gudhiyari, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

5. Mo. Farukh S/o Mo. Abdul Gaffar Aged About 44 Years R/o Mowa, V V Vihar, Street No. 06, P/s Pandri Mowa, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

... Petitioner(s)

¶12

versus

¶13

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through SHO P/s Golbazar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN BRIJMOHAN MORLE MORLE Date: 2025.11.17 17:42:08 +0530

¶15

2. Vipin Thakur S/o Vinay Thakur Aged About 40 Years R/o Ward No. 44, Kaurin Bhata, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. Currently At Himalyan Heights, Block No. 05, Dumartarai, P/s Mana Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶16

...Respondent(s)

¶17

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶18

2

¶19

For Petitioners : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate through video conferencing. For Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate.

¶20

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶21

Order on Board

¶22

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶23

17.11.2025

¶24

1. Heard Mr. Vinay Nagdev, learned counsel for the petitioners through video conferencing. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent No. 1.

¶25

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

¶26

“ It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned FIR numbered 61/2025, dated 18.04.2025 registered at Police Station Gol Bazar, Raipur, C.G., for offences under Section 146 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 79 of the Juvenile Justice Act and Section 3 and 14 of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, as also the charge-sheet filed in pursuance to the said FIR i.e., charge-sheet No. 64/2025 and the criminal proceedings initiated on the basis of the said charge-sheet in criminal case number 28335/2025, titled as “State of C.G. vs. Keshave Das Nagwani & Others”, pending before the JMFC, Raipur, C.G., and the order taking cognizance dated 02.07.2025 passed by the learned Court below to secure the ends of justice. ”

¶27

3

¶28

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 18.04.2025, the complainant/respondent No. 2 lodged a written report before the concerned Police Station alleging that, pursuant to the directions of the District Administration, Raipur, a rescue operation had been conducted on 17.04.2025 by a joint team comprising the complainant, the Protection Officer of the Women and Child Development Department, and police personnel of Police Station Golbazar, under the supervision of the ASP, ICUAW, Raipur. According to the complaint, six children, all admittedly above the age of fourteen years, were allegedly found engaged in hazardous and underpaid work in five shops owned by the petitioners. It was stated that Rojnamcha Sanha No. 27 was recorded regarding the incident and that offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), the Juvenile Justice Act, and the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 stood attracted.

¶29

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that based on this complaint, FIR No. 61/2025 dated 18.04.2025 was registered for offences under Section 146 of the BNS, Section 79 of the JJ Act, and Sections 3 and 14 of the Child Labour Act. During investigation, the police recorded the statements of the children and their parents/guardians and seized their birth certificates and school admission registers. A plain reading of these statements, it is argued, clearly reveals that none of the ingredients of the alleged offences are satisfied. The materials collected during investigation unambiguously establish that all the children were above fourteen years of age, thereby excluding the application of the prohibitory provisions of the Child

¶30

4

¶31

Labour Act as well as the Right to Education Act.

¶32

5. It is further contended that the offence under Section 146 of the BNS requires proof of unlawful compulsion and labour against the will of the person concerned. No such allegation finds place in the statements of any of the children or their guardians. There is no suggestion of coercion, threat, force, or involuntary labour. Similarly, Section 79 of the JJ Act contemplates ostensible engagement of a child, bondage for employment, or withholding/misuse of a child’s earnings. Even if the charge-sheet is taken at face value, none of these elements are made out. There is no allegation that any child was held in bondage or that their earnings were withheld or misappropriated. With respect to the Child Labour Act, it is argued that Section 3 prohibits employment of a “child”, and Section 2(ii) defines a child as a person below fourteen years of age. The documents seized during investigation conclusively establish that all rescued persons were above fourteen years. The essential condition for invoking Section 3 is therefore absent. It is further undisputed that the children were either undergoing vocational training or voluntarily assisting as salespersons during their summer vacation.

¶33

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner thus submits that the impugned charge-sheet has been filed mechanically and without any material establishing the essential ingredients of the alleged offences. Continuation of the criminal proceedings would therefore amount to an abuse of the process of law. It is accordingly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash FIR No. 61/2025 and the consequent

¶34

5

¶35

charge-sheet No. 64/2025 filed against the petitioners, and to pass any other appropriate order in the interest of justice. Hence, the present petition.

¶36

7. Per contra , learned State counsel opposes the submissions of the petitioner and submits that the investigation has been conducted strictly in accordance with law, and upon completion thereof, the final report/charge-sheet was duly filed before the learned trial Court, which has already taken cognizance of the offences.

¶37

8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have carefully perused the materials placed on record.

¶38

9. The legal position governing quashing of criminal proceedings is well settled. The power to quash an FIR, complaint or charge-sheet is to be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances. Courts ordinarily should not interfere with the investigation of cognizable offences. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or 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 charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or the inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS.

¶39

10. In the present case, after completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner, and the learned trial Court, upon due consideration of the materials, has found prima facie evidence of commission of the alleged offences and has taken

¶40

6

¶41

cognizance. Consequently, the trial has been initiated.

¶42

11. From a careful perusal of the FIR and the charge-sheet, it appears that on 18.04.2025, complainant, Vipin Thakur submitted an application alleging that on 17.04.2025, a rescue operation was conducted by a joint team consisting of district officials and police personnel. During inspection of the establishments—Tirupati Novelty, Mobile Galaxy, Jai Mobile Accessories, Balaji Watch and Smart Mobile—instances of child labour were allegedly detected. The investigation identified several children working at these establishments and age-related documents were seized from their respective schools and guardians. The operators of the five establishments were arrested and proceeded against, and upon finding material constituting offences under the Juvenile Justice Act and the Child Labour Act, the charge-sheet was filed.

¶43

12. Having considered the rival submissions and upon perusal of the FIR, and the charge-sheet, this Court finds that the allegations made in the present case cannot be said to be inherently absurd or improbable. The material collected during investigation, including seizure memos, school admission registers, birth certificates and the statements of the children and their guardians, prima facie discloses that minors were found working in commercial establishments owned by the petitioner. Whether such engagement amounts to an offence under the provisions invoked is a matter that requires evaluation of evidence, which lies within the domain of the trial Court.

¶44

13. At this stage, the Court is only required to examine whether the

¶45

7

¶46

charge-sheet discloses a prima facie case. The sufficiency, reliability or veracity of the evidence cannot be adjudicated in proceedings for quashing. The petitioners’ contention that the children were above fourteen years of age and voluntarily assisting during summer vacation is a matter of defence that can be established only during trial. It is well settled that disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction or in the exercise of inherent powers.

¶47

14. Further, the offences alleged under the Juvenile Justice Act and the Child and Adolescent Labour Act involve issues of child safety, welfare, employment conditions, and the nature of work undertaken. Determining whether the work performed was hazardous or prohibited, whether remuneration was paid fairly, or whether the engagement was exploitative, are all factual questions that necessitate a full-fledged trial. These cannot be decided merely on the basis of selective materials produced by the petitioners.

¶48

15. The petitioners have also argued that there was no coercion or unlawful compulsion as contemplated under Section 146 of the BNS. However, the presence or absence of coercion, voluntariness, work conditions, and the nature of employment are matters of evidence and cannot be conclusively determined at the stage of quashing. The trial Court has already applied its judicial mind and taken cognizance on finding prima facie material supporting the charges. This Court finds no perversity or illegality in such cognizance.

¶49

16. In view of the above, the Court finds that the petitioner has failed

¶50

8

¶51

to demonstrate that the allegations, even if taken at their face value, do not constitute any offence or that the continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. The case does not fall within the exceptional categories warranting exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction for quashing.

¶52

17. For the foregoing reasons and in view of the prima facie material supporting the charges and the cognizance taken by the learned trial Court, this Court does not find any ground to interfere in the present petition. The petition is, therefore, dismissed .

¶53

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

¶54

Brijmohan

Keshav Das Nagwani v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Keshav Das Nagwani v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madhaw Malik Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Baudha @ Daultram Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Jayesh Kumar Bhatia Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Guruveer Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anurag @ Annu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Aakash Jaiswal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh