Swapnil Mittal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:12376-DB

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 747 of 2026

¶5

MANPREET KAUR

¶6

Digitally signed by MANPREETKAUR Date: 2026.03.17 11:56:18 +0530

¶7

1 - Swapnil Mittal S/o Suresh Mittal Aged About 36 Years Partner Of M/s S M Shop, R/o D6 Sector-2 Agroha Society Behind Rewa Showroom, Raipura, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶8

2 - Garima Sharma W/o Swapnil Mittal Aged About 36 Years Partner Of M/s S M Shop, R/o D6 Sector-2 Agroha Society Behind Rewa Showroom, Raipura, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

3 - Suresh Mittal S/o Prahalad Mittal Aged About 67 Years Partner Of M/s S M Shop, R/o D6 Sector-2 Agroha Society Behind Rewa Showroom, Raipura, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

4 - Piyush Rathi S/o Shri Suresh Kumar Rathi Aged About 39 Years R/o House No. 15/887, Mamta Hospital, Jawahar Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

5 - Vikram Singh S/o Shri Ramashray Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o E- 70, Sankalp Vatika, Samta Colony Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

6 - Smt. Neha Singh W/o Vikram Singh Aged About 34 Years R/o E-70 Sankalp Vatika, Samta Colony Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

... Petitioner(s)

¶14

versus

¶15

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Azad Chowk, Raipur (C.G.)

¶16

2 - Drolia Electrosteels Through It's Director Mr. Anand Chaudhari, R/o B- 87 Wallfort City Bhathagaon Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶17

... Respondent(s)

¶18

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akhand Pratap, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer and Mr. Sudhanshu Upadhyay, Advocate

¶19

2

¶20

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶21

Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

¶22

Order on Board

¶23

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 16.03.2026

¶24

1. Heard Mr. Akhand Pratap, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Sourabh Sahu, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent No.1/State as well as Mr. Sudhanshu Upadhyay (through video conferencing), learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶25

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

¶26

“ 1. Quash and set aside Charge-Sheet bearing No. 232 of 2022 and supplementary Charge-Sheet bearing No. 232- A of 2023, submitted by Police Station Azad Chowk,, District Raipur in FIR No. 166 of 2022 registered under Sections 120B & 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the ground of compromise.

¶27

2. Quash and set aside the order dated 11.11.2022 & 22.03.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Raipur, whereby cognizance was taken against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 120B & 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,

¶28

3. Quash and set aside the order dated 13.02.2026 passed in criminal case No. 15617 of 2022, passed by the learned learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Raipur Raipur District Raipur whereby charges under Sections 120B & 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

¶29

3

¶30

have been framed against the petitioners.

¶31

4. Quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 15617 of 2022, for the offence punishable under Sections 120B & 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 pending before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Raipur Raipur District Raipur, as continuation of the said trial would amount to abuse of the process of Court in light of the amicable settlement between the parties.

¶32

5. Pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. ”

¶33

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that subsequent to the registration of the case, the parties have amicably resolved their dispute and entered into a lawful compromise, copy of which has been annexed with the present petition as Annexure P/5, pursuant to which a joint application for compounding of the offence was preferred before the learned Trial Court. However, since the charge included the offence punishable under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code along with Section 420 IPC, and the offence under Section 120-B IPC does not fall within the category of compoundable offences, the learned Trial Court rejected the said application for compounding. Hence this present petition.

¶34

4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 supports the submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶35

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the prayers and pleadings made in the petition along with the annexures annexed in this petition.

¶36

6. From perusal of the settlement agreement dated 04.12.2025, it

¶37

4

¶38

appears that the petitioners and respondents No. 2/complainant have already settled their dispute and compromised the matter outside the Court.

¶39

7. Taking into consideration that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled by the parties by way of settlement agreement, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in proceeding any further against the petitioners in this matter.

¶40

8. In that view of the matter, the criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 15617/2022 arising out of Final Report No.232/2022 and supplementary charge-sheet No. 232-A/2023 in pursuance to the FIR bearing Crime No. 166/2022 dated registered at Police Station Azad Chowk, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B and 420 of the IPC against the petitioners is hereby quashed subject to the condition that the petitioners shall comply with the terms and conditions of the settlement deed dated 04.12.2026 (Annexure A/5) arrived at between the parties.

¶41

9. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above.

¶42

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

¶43

Manpreet

Swapnil Mittal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swapnil Mittal 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

Ashu Sen @ Gundul Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Bhumika Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dilip Singh Sisodiya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chandrika Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

The Director Vs Dr. Arif Khan

Real Value Engineering and Services Vs Bikrem Buildcon