Dismissed¶62

Dr. Priyanka Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 May 2026CRMP/1138/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR/charge-sheet/cognizance refused at threshold; Article 226 writ and Section 528 BNSS inherent powers exercised sparingly only in exceptional cases; IPC 420 cheating, 511 attempt, 120-B criminal conspiracy, 467/468 forgery of medical records; postmortem fang mark versus organophosphorus poisoning and alcohol intoxication; death portrayed as snakebite for compensation claim; manipulation of medical records; charge-sheet filed and cognizance taken, trial in progress; advocate and forensic-medicine doctor as accused; High Court of Chhattisgarh CRMP 2026.

What did the court decide?

The jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases; Courts should not ordinarily interfere with investigations of cognizable offences. ¶57

Dr. Priyanka Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶62

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR dated 07.05.2025 (Crime No.194/2025, Police Station Bilha) under Sections 420, 511, 120-B IPC, the final report/charge-sheet No.237/2025 dated 06.07.2025 (adding Sections 467, 468 IPC), the cognizance order dated 08.07.2025 and the consequential proceedings in Criminal Case No.1996/2025 should be quashed. +1 more

¶31

Court's answer

¶57

Ratio / Principle

Where the allegations in the FIR or complaint, even 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 or inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS.

¶57

Key takeaways

From perusal of the FIR and charge-sheet there existed sufficient material indicating commission of cognizable offences.ratio¶61
The investigation brought on record allegations of manipulation of medical records, projection of a false cause of death, and a conspiracy to secure pecuniary gain by portraying the death as one caused by snake bite.ratio¶61
At this stage meticulous appreciation of evidentiary value is impermissible; therefore it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed or that continuation of prosecution is an abuse of process, and the petitions do not fall in any category in which the Court can exercise jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Ramesh Sinha, CJ and Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J; order per Ramesh Sinha, CJ), 04/05/2026 — CRMP No. 1119 of 2026 (Kamta Sahu) and CRMP No. 1138 of 2026 (Dr. Priyanka Soni) DISMISSED. The petitioners sought quashing of FIR Crime No.194/2025 dated 07.05.2025 (Police Station Bilha) under Sections 420, 511, 120-B IPC, the final report/charge-sheet No.237/2025 dated 06.07.2025 adding Sections 467, 468 IPC, and the cognizance order dated 08.07.2025 in Criminal Case No.1996/2025, arising from the death of Shivkumar Ghritlahre (Crime No.61/2023) whose postmortem by petitioner Dr. Soni recorded a fang mark and 'snake bite', while an experts' committee opined death was due to unknown poison with excessive alcohol intoxication. Held: quashing jurisdiction under Article 226/Section 528 BNSS is exceptional; the FIR and charge-sheet disclosed sufficient material — manipulation of medical records, projection of a false cause of death, and conspiracy for pecuniary gain by portraying the death as snakebite; meticulous appreciation of evidence being impermissible at this stage, no cognizable offence was absent and the proceedings were not quashed.

2026:CGHC:20655-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRMP No. 1119 of 2026

¶6

Kamta Sahu S/o Late Ramlal Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Pendari, Police Station- Bilha, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶7

--- Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station, Bilha, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.)

¶10

2 - Rupesh Tigga Posted As Head Constable, Police Station, Bilha, DistrictBilaspur (C.G.) (Complainant)

¶11

--- Respondents

¶12

For petitioner : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate.

¶13

For Respondent/State: Dr. Saurabh Pande, Deputy Advocate General

¶14

CRMP No. 1138 of 2026

¶15

Dr. Priyanka Soni W/o Shri Mihir Savita Mohan Aged About 36 Years R/o 314 H.B. Estate, Phase 3, Sonegaon, Nagpur, District Nagpur, Maharashtra.

¶16

--- Petitioner

¶17

Versus

¶18

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

¶19

2 - Secretary Department of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶20

3 - Superintendent of Police Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

¶21

Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH ASHUTOSH MISHRA MISHRA Date: 2026.05.14 19:20:39 +0530

¶22

--- Respondents

¶23

¶24

For petitioner : Mr. R.S. Marhas, Advocate along with Ms. Shriya Jaiswal, Advocate

¶25

For Respondent/State: Dr. Saurabh Pande, Deputy Advocate General

¶26

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board

¶27

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶28

04/05/2026

¶29

Heard Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the petitioner in CRMP No.1119 of 2026; Mr. R.S. Marhas, Advocate along with Ms. Shriya Jaiswal, learned counsel for petitioner in CRMP No.1138 of 2026. Also heard Dr. Saurabh Pande, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State/Respondents.

¶30

CRMP No.1119 of 2026 {Kamta Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Another} has been filed with the following relief(s):

¶31

(i) Quash the impugned FIR dated 07.05.2025 bearing Crime No.194/2025 registered at Police Station, Bilha, District-Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 420, 511, 120-B of IPC against the petitioner.

¶32

(ii) Quash the impugned Final Report No.237/2025 dated 06.07.2025 filed by Police Station, Bilha, DistrictBilaspur (C.G.) before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 420, 511, 120-B, 467, 468 of IPC against

¶33

¶34

the petitioner.

¶35

(iii) Quash the impugned cognizance order dated 08.07.2025 and the entire criminal proceedings pending in Criminal Case No.1996/2025 before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District-Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶36

(iv) Grant any other relief (s) which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in favour of petitioner may also be granted in the interest of justice.

¶37

CRMP No.1138 of 2026 {Dr. Priyanka Soni Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others} has been filed with the following relief(s):

¶38

I. Quash the impugned First Information Report No.194/2025 registered at Police Station Bilha, District Bilaspur dated 07.05.2025 against the Petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 511 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code; &

¶39

II. Quash the impugned charge sheet (Annexure P/1) dated 06.07.2025 filed against the Petitioner before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 511, 120-B, 467 & 468 of Indian Penal Code in consequence of First Information Report No.194/2025 registered at Police Station Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh; &

¶40

¶41

III. Quash the order taking cognizance dated 08.07.2025 (Annexure P/2) passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District Bilaspur in Criminal Case No.1996/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 511, 120-B, 467 & 468 of Indian Penal Code and also quash the consequential criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.1996/2025 pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh against the Petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 511, 120-B, 467 & 468 of Indian Penal Coe.

¶42

¶43

IV. Grant any other relief as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and under the circumstances of the case may be granted in the interest of justice and equity.

¶44

The prosecution story in brief is that on the death of one Shivkumar Ghritalhare, son of Parag Das, aged about 36 years, resident of Village Podi, Police Station Bilha, District Bilaspur, Crime No. 61/2023 was registered at Police Station Bilha. It is alleged that on 12.11.2023, the deceased consumed an unknown poisonous substance along with alcohol, resulting in his death during treatment 14.11.2023. Initially, the family members informed that the deceased had suffered a poisonous animal bite while cleaning the garden, which led to his hospitalization. Subsequently, medical records obtained from CIMS Bilaspur reflected ingestion of poison and alcohol, with relevant documents containing

¶45

¶46

signatures of the deceased's father and wife. Thereafter, a committee of medical experts was constituted, which opined that the cause of death was cardiac and respiratory failure due to the side effects of unknown poison with excessive alcohol intoxication. Though snakebite marks were reportedly present, the possibility of snakebite could not be conclusively established. Moreover, as per the Panchnama conducted by the police, no visible snakebite marks were found on the deceased's body.

¶47

On the basis of the above incident, the FIR bearing Crime No.194/2025 has been registered at Police Station, Bilha for the offence under Sections 420, 511, 120-B of IPC and upon completion of usual investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) and by order dated 08/07/2025 the learned JMFC, Bilha has taken the cognizance. Hence this petition.

¶48

Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the petitioner Kamta Sahu, would submit that the allegation against the present petitioner is that he is an advocate by profession and he has misleaded the family members of the deceased by advising them to file a claim for compensation suggesting that in snakebite cases, compensation of 3,00,000/- is provided, and allegedly demanded 1,50,000/- as his share. It is submitted that the allegation made against the present petitioner is totally false because being an advocate the petitioner can give advice as his profession that in snake bite cases there is provision of compensation and the said act was purely professional in nature. It

¶49

¶50

is further submitted that the claim case pending before the Naib Tehsildar, Bilha, has not been filed by the present petitioner which shows the non-involvement of the petitioner in any wrongful manner. In support of his contention he placed reliance upon the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Vinod Natesan Vs. State of Kerala {(2019) 2 SCC 401} and Bimla Tiwari Vs. State of Bihar {SLP (CRL) No.834-835 of 2023} and would submit that the instant CRMP may be allowed.

¶51

Mr. R.S. Marhas, learned counsel assisted by Ms. Shriya Jaiswal, learned counsel for the Petitioner Dr. Priyanka Soni, would submit that the petitioner is a duly graduated doctor having educational qualification of MBBS and MD specialized in Forensic Medicine. She is well aware about her role and duties towards the law as well as the society. It is further submitted that the Petitioner was working on the post of Demonstrator in the Department of Forensic Medicine at Chhattisgarh Institute of Medical Sciences, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh on account of 2-year bond from 21.05.2022 to 20.05.2024. She was drawing a salary of Rs. 69,350/-per month. While working as such on 14.11.2023, she received a requisition form from the Police Outpost Chhattisgarh Institute of Medical Sciences, City Kotwali, District Bilaspur for conducting postmortem of deceased named Shivkumar Ghritlahre. The postmortem requisition form specifically stated that the relatives of the deceased informed that while the deceased was working in the courtyard, he was bit by a snake. It is further submitted that the Petitioner conducted postmortem of the deceased and found fang mark on the posterior aspect of index toe of leg of deceased and

¶52

¶53

therefore, on the basis of the skill acquired and competence, reached to the conclusion of cause of death to be "snake bite". Thereafter, the body of the deceased was handed over to the family members and they buried it. After passage of 8 months on 10.07.2024, the City Superintendent of Police, Chakarbhata raised various queries from the Medical Superintendent, CIMS, Bilaspur regarding the death of the deceased Shivkumar Ghritlahre. It was specifically questioned, apart from other queries that whether the deceased died by snake bite. Dr. Ashutosh Kori replied to the query raised by the City Superintendent stating that the deceased did not succumb to snake bite. It was also stated by Dr. Kori on query that the deceased was admitted in to treat the disease of Alcohol Intoxication with Organophosphorus poisoning and he was being treated for Alcohol Intoxication with Organophosphorus poisoning. It is further submitted that Dr. Ashutosh Kori was at the relevant time an Associate Professor, Medicine Department, Chhattisgarh Institute of Medical Sciences and is not expert in forensic medicine. It is further submitted that pursuant to the opinion sought by the SHO, Police Station Bilha regarding the cause of death of the deceased a committee of three members was constituted and the committed came to the conclusion that the deceased died due to cardiac and respiratory failure caused by the side effects of unknown poison while under the influence of excessive alchohol and in case of presence of snake bite marks on the body of the deceased, the possibility of the deceased being bitten by a snake cannot be ruled out. It is therefore prayed that under the circumstances the instant petition may be allowed.

¶54

¶55

On the other, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that the investigation has been done strictly in accordance with law and after completion of investigation the final report/charge-sheet has been filed before the trial Court and the learned trial Court had already taken the cognizance and the trial is in progress.

¶56

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

¶57

The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a chargesheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases and Courts should not ordinarily interfere with the investigations of cognizable offences. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the 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 the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS.

¶58

In the present case, admittedly, after completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner and the learned trial Court has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 420, 511, 120-B of IPC and the charge-sheet has been filed.

¶59

From perusal of the FIR and charge-sheet, it transpires that there existed sufficient material indicating commission of cognizable

¶60

¶61

offences. The investigation has brought on record allegations of manipulation of medical records, projection of a false cause of death, and a conspiracy to secure pecuniary gain by portraying the death as one caused by snake bite. At this stage, meticulous appreciation of evidentiary value is impermissible. Therefore, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is disclosed or that continuation of prosecution is an abuse of process. Therefore, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out. Hence, the present petition does not fall in any of such category, wherein, this Court can exercise jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS.

¶62

In view of the above, we do not find it a case to quash the FIR bearing Crime No. 194/2025 dated 07/05/2025 registered at Police Station, Bilha, District Bilaspur, C.G.; impugned final Report No.237/2025 dated 06/07/2025 filed by the Police Station, Bilha, District – Bilaspur, C.G. before the JMFC, Bilha, District- Bilsapur, C.G. for the offence under Sections 420, 511, 120-B, 467, 468 of IPC and the order taking cognizance dated 08/07/2025 and the consequential criminal proceedings bearing Criminal Case No. 1996/2025 pending before the learned trial Court, as such, this petition is dismissed.

¶63

SD/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶64

SD/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice

¶65

ashu

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
FIR Crime No.194/2025 dated 07.05.2025 registered at Police Station Bilha for offences under Sections 420, 511, 120-B IPC; Final Report/charge-sheet No.237/2025 dated 06.07.2025 filed before the JMFC adding Sections 467, 468 IPC; order taking cognizance dated 08.07.2025 in Criminal Case No.1996/2025 and the consequential criminal proceedings before the JMFC, Bilha.¶35
Police Station Bilha / Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
Prior proceeding
Unnatural death of Shivkumar Ghritlahre/Ghritalhare (son of Parag Das, aged about 36, Village Podi, PS Bilha): on 12.11.2023 he consumed an unknown poisonous substance with alcohol and died during treatment on 14.11.2023; family initially claimed snakebite; Crime No.61/2023 was registered at Police Station Bilha.¶44
Prior proceeding
Postmortem of the deceased was conducted by petitioner Dr. Priyanka Soni (then Demonstrator, Department of Forensic Medicine, CIMS Bilaspur, on bond duty) on a police requisition recording the relatives' claim of snakebite; she found a fang mark and recorded cause of death as 'snake bite'; the body was buried by the family.¶51
Prior proceeding
A committee of medical experts opined the cause of death was cardiac and respiratory failure due to side effects of unknown poison with excessive alcohol intoxication; snakebite marks were reportedly present but snakebite could not be conclusively established; the police Panchnama found no visible snakebite marks.¶46
Prior proceeding
FIR bearing Crime No.194/2025 was registered at Police Station Bilha for offences under Sections 420, 511, 120-B IPC.¶47
Prior proceeding
Upon completion of investigation the charge-sheet (Final Report No.237/2025 dated 06.07.2025) was filed before the learned JMFC, Bilha, and by order dated 08/07/2025 the JMFC took cognizance in Criminal Case No.1996/2025.¶47
Prior proceeding
As submitted for the State, investigation was done strictly in accordance with law, the final report/charge-sheet was filed, cognizance was taken, and the trial is in progress.¶55
Prior proceeding
According to the petitioner's submissions, after 8 months, on 10.07.2024 the City Superintendent of Police, Chakarbhata raised queries from the Medical Superintendent, CIMS Bilaspur about the death; Dr. Ashutosh Kori (Associate Professor, Medicine, not a forensic expert) replied that the deceased did not succumb to snakebite and had been treated for alcohol intoxication with organophosphorus poisoning; a three-member committee thereafter gave the opinion noted above.¶53

Dr. Priyanka Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Priyanka Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Praveen Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ajay Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Banshidhar Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Chandra Tripathi Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Bablu Sonwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vikash Kumar Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh