Chattisgarh High Court
Jugal Kishore Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 29 April, 2025
1/4
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MANPREET
KAUR
Digitally signed
CRMP No. 1431 of 2025
by MANPREET
KAUR
Date: 2025.04.30
10:43:14 +0530 Jugal Kishore Singh Versus State Of Chhattisgarh
Order Sheet
29.04.2025 Heard Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, learned counsel
for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Malay Jain, learned
Panel Lawyer for respondents No. 1 / State.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner in the present crime number have falsely
been implicated by the complainant and all the
allegations levelled against the petitioner are fake, vague
and are an afterthought just to harass petitioner
therefore, the said F.I.R. as well as the entire criminal
proceeding emanating therefrom against the petitioner
are liable to be set aside. The registration of the First
Information Report against the petitioner and subsequent
filing of charge-sheet has been done without there being
any enquiry or investigation with regard to the delay
where for 30 years petitioner had already served the
company. From the perusal of the documents annexed in
the petition, it would be crystal clear that the complainant
without disclosing the correct fact before the police of
Police Station- Bishrampur was successful in getting the
FIR registered against the present petitioner and
suppressing all the said facts even subsequently the
charge-sheet has been filed where even the SECL
authorities themselves admitted that they had given
employment as per the then practice prevailing. From the
plain reading in the FIR and the material brought on
record in the chargesheet even, it would be clear that the
petitioner had not suppressed any information at the time
of appointment on the contrary after disclosure being
made the Company had given appointment which in no
manner can be termed as cheating. The complainant
respondent no.2 was aware that the appointment was
given by the company after verifying the entire facts
knowingly that the petitioner is not family member of land
oustee which makes the allegations made in the FIR &
Charge-sheet absurd to the extent that no prudent man
can ever reach a just conclusion that there is any
sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioner.
Reliance is placed in the judgment passed by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Manoj Kumar
Sharma and others v. State Of Chhattisgarh and
others, 2016 (9) SCC 1.
In view of the above, issue notice to the
respondent No.2 by ordinary post as well as registered
post.
Learned State counsel appears and accepts notice
on behalf of respondent No.1, therefore, issuance of
notice to it, is dispensed with.
Process Fee be paid within a week only for
respondent No.2.
Notice be made returnable in four weeks.
Two weeks' time is granted to the learned State
counsel as well as respondent No.2 to file their reply-
affidavit and thereafter, two weeks' time is granted to the
learned counsel for the petitioner to file rejoinder
affidavit.
List the matter thereafter.
Till then, further proceedings against the
petitioner, namely, Jugal Kishore Singh in Criminal
Case No. 2390/2024 in pursuance to the charge-sheet
bearing Final Report No.47/2024 dated 18.02.2024
against FIR bearing Crime No. 171/2023 for offence
under Sections 420 of the IPC, shall remain stayed,
subject to the condition that the petitioner shall co-
operate in the investigation.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Manpreet
