Dismissed¶29

Atul Dansena v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC18 Jan 2026CRMP/3854/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Atul Dansena; Ashok Jaiswal; State of Chhattisgarh; CRMP No. 3854 of 2025; High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; Ramesh Sinha Chief Justice; Ravindra Kumar Agrawal; FIR Crime No. 24 of 2025; P.S. City Kotwali Raigarh; Section 103(1) BNS; Sections 238, 61(2), 331(8), 3(5) BNS; charge-sheet No. 73 of 2025; cognizance 03.05.2025; charge framed 19.06.2025; Session Trial No. 45 of 2025; First Additional Session Judge Raigarh; double murder; heinous crime; expedite trial; no deliberate delay; petition dismissed 19.01.2026; Ravindra Sharma advocate; Shailendra Sharma Panel Lawyer; NAFR.

What did the court decide?

The case relates to a double murder, involving serious and grave allegations. ¶24

Atul Dansena Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition should be allowed and the FIR/Crime No. 24 of 2025, charge-sheet No. 73 of 2025, cognizance order dated 03.05.2025, charge-framing order dated 19.06.2025 (all under the BNS) and the consequent Session Trial No. 45 of 2025 proceedings quashed. +1 more

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The case relates to a double murder, involving serious and grave allegations.

¶24

Key takeaways

No material was placed on record to demonstrate deliberate delay or inaction on the part of the learned trial Court.ratio¶26
It is well settled that in serious offences, particularly those involving heinous crimes, the High Court should be slow in issuing directions for expeditious disposal unless exceptional circumstances are shown.ratio¶27
Since the trial had already commenced and was progressing in a normal manner, no ground was made out for interference or for issuance of any direction to expedite the trial; consequently the Court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (CRMP No. 3854 of 2025) by Atul Dansena before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Division Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge; order per Ramesh Sinha, CJ), decided 19.01.2026, dismissed. The petition sought quashing of FIR/Crime No. 24 of 2025 of P.S. City Kotwali, Raigarh (offence punishable under Section 103(1) BNS), charge-sheet No. 73 of 2025 (Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2), 331(8), 3(5) BNS), cognizance order dated 03.05.2025 of the Sessions Judge, Raigarh, charge-framing order dated 19.06.2025 (Sections 103(1)/3(5), 238/3(5), 61(2), 331(8)/3(5) BNS) and the consequential Session Trial No. 45 of 2025 before the First Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh. At hearing, counsel conceded the trial was underway (two prosecution witnesses recorded) and confined the prayer to a direction to expedite the trial. The Court held that the case is a double murder with serious and grave allegations; that no deliberate delay or inaction by the trial Court was demonstrated; that in heinous crimes the High Court should be slow to direct expedited disposal absent exceptional circumstances; and that, the trial progressing normally, no ground for interference existed. Petition dismissed; no relief granted; no costs or amounts mentioned. No precedent was cited by name.

2026:CGHC:2924-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRMP No. 3854 of 2025

¶6

Atul Dansena S/o Shri Kartikeshwar Dansena, Aged About 23 Years R/o Indira Nagar, P.S. Kotwali Raigarh, Tah. And Dist. Raigarh (C.G.)

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. City Kotwali, Raigarh, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.)

¶10

2. Ashok Jaiswal S/o Late Shri Narayan Prasad Jaiswal, R/o Laxmipur, Raigarh, P.S. City Kotwali, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.)

¶11

...Respondent(s)

¶12

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer.

¶14

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

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶17

19.01.2026

¶18

1. Heard Mr. Ravindra Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shailendra Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondent No. 1.

¶19

Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN BRIJMOHAN MORLE MORLE Date: 2026.01.19 17:37:40 +0530

¶20

¶21

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

¶22

“ It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition and quash the FIR/Crime No. 24 of 2025 registered as P.S. City Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigarh for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS, charge-sheet No. 73 of 2025 filed for the offence punishable under Section 103(1), 238, 61(2), 331(8) and 3(5) of BNS, order of cognizance dated 03.05.2025 passed by learned Session Judge, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.), order of charge framed against the petitioner dated 19.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 103(1)/3(5), 238/3(5), 61(2), 331 (8)/3(5) of BNS and other consequential criminal proceedings pending before First Additional Session Judge Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) registered as Session Trial No. 45 of 2025, in the interest of justice. ”

¶23

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner was heard at length. During the course of arguments, it was fairly submitted that the trial is already in progress and the evidence of two prosecution witnesses has been recorded. Learned counsel, therefore, confined the relief and prayed for a direction to expedite the trial.

¶24

4. This Court has considered the submissions made and perused the record. The case relates to a double murder, involving serious and grave allegations. The Sessions Trial is of the year 2025 and is presently proceeding before the learned trial Court in accordance with law. No material has been placed on record to demonstrate any

¶25

¶26

deliberate delay or inaction on the part of the learned trial Court.

¶27

5. It is well settled that in serious offences, particularly those involving heinous crimes, the High Court should be slow in issuing directions for expeditious disposal unless exceptional circumstances are shown. In the present case, the trial has already commenced and is progressing in a normal manner. Therefore, no ground is made out for interference or for issuance of any direction to expedite the trial.

¶28

6. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds no merit in the present petition.

¶29

7. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed .

¶30

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

¶31

Brijmohan

Atul Dansena v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Dansena 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

M/S Jai Maa Gajgouri Fly Ash Bricks Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Manbarta Devi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deepak Sahu Vs Siddharth Begami

Chandrika Prasad Sonwani Vs State Government

Chandrashekhar Gaikwad Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr.

Abhishek Dubey Vs State of Chhattisgarh