Dismissed¶27

Anil Kumar Patil v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Apr 2026CRMP/1068/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing petition under Section 528 BNSS (CRMP 1068 of 2026, Chhattisgarh HC) dismissed as defective: charge-sheet in case no. 1551/2025 (State of C.G. vs. Anil Kumar and another, offence u/s 85 BNS, J.M.F.C. Simga, Balodabazar-Bhatapara) challenged without challenging cognizance or framing-of-charge orders; prayer held casually drafted. Liberty to refile with appropriate prayer subject to Rs. 1,000/- cost to Registry, routed to Children Observation Home, Pulgaon, Durg.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh petition with appropriate prayer, subject to depositing Rs. 1,000/- as cost with the Registry of the High Court and submitting the receipt at the time of filing the fresh petition; the deposited amount, if any, to be transmitted to the Children Observation Home, Pulgaon, Durg (C.G.). ¶27

Anil Kumar Patil Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Dowry and Cruelty | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition under Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of the chargesheet and pending proceedings in case no. 1551/2025 (offence u/s 85 BNS) before J.M.F.C. Simga can be entertained when the orders taking cognizance and framing of charge have not been challenged.

¶25

Court's answer

The prayer to quash the charge-sheet is defective: the petitioners neither challenged the order taking cognizance (nor mentioned its date) nor the order framing charge, though the charges stand already framed; the prayer was drafted casually and wasted the Court's time, and in the Court's opinion the prayer is a defective one.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

On this ground alone the petition is dismissed, with liberty to file a fresh petition with appropriate prayer, subject to depositing Rs. 1,000/- as cost with the Registry (receipt to be produced with any fresh petition), the deposited amount to be transmitted to the Children Observation Home, Pulgaon, Durg (C.G.).

¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, CRMP No. 1068 of 2026 (bench: Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice, author; Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge; order dated 16.04.2026). Petition under Section 528, Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita praying for quashing of the chargesheet and proceedings pending before the Court of J.M.F.C., Simga in case no. 1551/2025 (State of C.G. vs. Anil Kumar and another) for alleged offence u/s 85 of the B.N.S. DISMISSED solely because the petition neither challenged the order taking cognizance (whose date was not even mentioned) nor the order framing charge, the charge having already been framed; the prayer was held casually drafted and wasteful of the Court's time. Dismissal accompanied by liberty to file a fresh petition with appropriate prayer, subject to payment of Rs. 1,000/- as cost to the Registry (receipt to be filed with the fresh petition), the deposit to be transmitted to the Children Observation Home, Pulgaon, Durg (C.G.).

2026:CGHC:17329-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1068 of 2026

¶5

1 - Anil Kumar Patil S/o Late Vijay Kumar Patil Aged About 39 Years R/o Purani Basti, Ward No. 13, Krishna Grand City Road, Raja Talab, Kohka, Chowki Smriti Nagar, Thana Supela, Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Kumari Bai Patil W/o Late Vijay Kumar Patil Aged About 56 Years R/o Purani Basti, Ward No. 13, Krishna Grand City Road, Raja Talab, Kohka, Chowki Smriti Nagar, Thana Supela, Bhilai, District- Durg, C.G. Originally R/o 562 (1), Ward No. 19, Bazaar Chowk, Sahaspur, District- Bemetara (C.G.)

¶6

... Petitioners

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Home Department Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

2 - Superintendent of Police District- Durg, S.P. Office, District- Durg, (C.G.)

¶10

3 - Incharge Smriti Nagar Police Chowki Smriti Nagar, Bhilai, DistrictDurg, C.G.

¶11

4 - Superintendent of Police District- Balodabazar Bhatapara, S.P. Office, District- Balodabazar Bhatapara, (C.G.)

¶12

5 - Town Inspector Thana Simga, District- Balodabazar Bhatapara, (C.G.)

¶13

6 - Smt. Madhuri Patil W/o Anil Kumar Patil Aged About 31 Years R/o Saket Nagar, Ward No. 13, Raja Garden Near Bhela Talab, Smriti Nagar, Supela, Bhilai, Thana Supela, District- Durg, C.G. Present Address - Village- Darchura, Thana Simga, District- Balodabazar Bhatapara, (C.G.)

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA

¶16

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners : Mr. Ankit Swarnakar, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. Govt. Advocate

¶17

Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

¶18

Order on Board

¶19

¶20

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶21

16.04.2026

¶22

Heard Mr. Ankit Swarnakar, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

¶23

The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita with the following prayers :-

¶24

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Court may pleased to order as to quash the Chargesheet and proceeding pending before the learned Court of J.M.F.C. Simga, District BalodabazarBhatapra, C.G. in case no. 1551/2025 bearing parties State of C.G. vs. Anil Kumar and another (Annexure P-1) (Colly) for the alleged offence u/s 85 of the B.N.S. by allowing this petition in the ends of justice.”

¶25

From perusal of the prayers and pleadings made in the instant petition, it transpires that though the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the charge-sheet, but, have neither challenged the order taking cognizance nor have mentioned the date of order taking cognizance and have also not challenged the order framing charge, as the charges have already been, which goes to show that the prayer drafted by learned counsel for the petitioners is in a very casual manner and further wasted the precious time of the Court, as such, in the opinion of this Court, the prayer is defective one.

¶26

¶27

Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed on this ground alone with liberty to file afresh petition with appropriate prayer, subject to depositing a sum of Rs.1,000/- as cost by the petitioners before the Registry of this Court and submit a receipt of the same at the time of filing of the fresh petition, if any, and the amount so deposited, if any, shall be transmitted to the Children Observation

¶28

Home, Pulgaon, Durg (C.G.).

¶29

Sd/Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶30

Chandra

Anil Kumar Patil v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar Patil 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

Swapnil Mittal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Milan Bargah Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nilesh Kumar Vs the Board of Revenue

Dheluram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nashimuddin Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Sushmita Manthapurwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh