Thakur Das Kotwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:22561-DB

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRMP No. 387 of 2022

¶6

1 - Thakur Das Kotwani S/o Tahal Ram Kotwani Aged About 47 Years R/o Chakarbhata, Nagar Panchayat Bodri, Tahsil Belha, Police Station Chakarbhata, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

AMARDEEP CHOUBEY

¶10

Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.06.10 10:29:12 +0530

¶11

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Chirmiri, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

For Petitioners : Mr. Saleem Kazi, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer.

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

¶16

Judgment on Board

¶17

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶18

09/06/2025

¶19

The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR No.95/2020 registered at P.S. Chirmiri, District: Koriya, Chhattisgarh and all subsequent proceedings including the charge sheet filed in the Court of learned J.M.F.C, Koriya.

¶20

2

¶21

Facts of the case, in brief, is that the complainant namely Amit Saluja, a transporter, lodged a written complaint against the petitioner that the petitioner, who works as a Manager, was in connivence with the truck driver, unloaded the trucks bearing registration numbers CG 15 CX 0935 and CG 15 CX 1968 in the depot and the coal of inferior quality was loaded in both the trucks and the same was supplied to Jaypee Cement Satna.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner was not named in the FIR and he has been falsely implicated only on the basis of the statement of co-accused persons. He submits that no seizure has been made from him and no reason has been explained for lodging the FIR with delay of almost one month. He further submits that no summons was issued to the petitioner with respect to the charge sheet submitted against him.

¶23

On the other hand, learned State counsel oppose the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the charge sheet has been filed in the present case against the petitioner and the trial has been commenced.

¶24

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶25

From bare perusal of the final report submitted against the petitioner, it is manifest that the petitioner who works as a Manager was unloaded the trucks in connivance with the drivers and the

¶26

3

¶27

inferior quality of coal was loaded and thereafter, the same was supplied to Jaypee Cement, Satna, we find that it cannot be said that it does not disclose any cognizable offence and even the trial has already been commenced hence, we are not inclined to entertain the petition at this stage. However, the trial Court is requested to conclude the trial expeditiously.

¶28

Accordingly, the present CRMP is dismissed.

¶29

SD/SD/-

¶30

(Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶31

Amardeep/ Jyoti

Thakur Das Kotwani v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thakur Das Kotwani 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

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Avinash Singh

Pushpa Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Harpreet Singh Sandhu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deepchand Alias Amirchand Pasi Vs Steel Authority of India Limited

Jayram Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Shivratri Ratrey Vs State Of Chhattisgarh