Chattisgarh High Court
Avinash Netam vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 May, 2025
1/4
Digitally
signed by
YOGESH
YOGESH TIWARI
TIWARI Date:
2025.05.20
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
16:11:52
+0530
CRMP No. 1703 of 2025
AVINASH NETAM versus STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Order Sheet
20.05.2025 Heard Mr. Manish Nigam, learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned
Government Advocate, appearing for the
State/respondent No.1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is working as a Doctor and the private
respondent No.2 is working as a Staff Nurse and they
both are presently posted at the Government Medical
College, Dimrapal, Bastar, District-Bastar. He further
submits that on 10.12.2021, their marriage was
solemnized as per the social rituals and immediately
after the marriage, the differences arose between them
and as such, private respondent No.2, lodged an FIR
against the petitioner for alleged commission of offences
under section 376-B, 294 & 323 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860. Thereafter, on 10.01.2024, the petitioner
and private respondent No.2 moved an application under
Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the
Family Court, Jagdalpur, District-Bastar for grant of
decree of divorce by mutual consent. Meanwhile, on the
basis of investigation, the police authorities submitted a
closure report in the FIR bearing Crime No.105/2023. He
also submits that on 10.06.2024, the statement of
Investigation Officer was recorded and he stated that
during investigation, it was found that the private
respondent No.2 has lodged a false report against the
present petitioner as well as the private respondent No.2,
in her statement, submitted that she is satisfied with the
investigation and she has no objection to the closure
report filed by the police authorities. It has been
contended that on 24.10.2024, private respondent No.2
submitted her statement in the form of affidavit before
the Family Court and submitted that she has given
approval to the closure report pending before the learned
Magistrate and in future, she did not want to pursue the
case pending before the learned Magistrate for offence
under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
against her husband i.e. the petitioner. It has been
further contended that the petitioner has also submitted
his affidavit and recorded his statement before the
Family Court and based on the deposition of the parties,
the learned Family Court vide its judgment dated
11.11.2024, annulled the marriage of present petitioner
and private respondent No.2 and accordingly passed a
decree of divorce by mutual consent. It has been further
contended that after grant of decree of divorce, the case
came up for hearing before the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bastar at Jagdalpur, the learned Magistrate
vide impugned order dated 02.05.2025 rejected the
closure report filed by the police authorities observing
that the offence alleged to have been committed is
serious in nature and the same are not compoundable,
as such, he prays that the impugned FIR bearing Crime
No.105/2023 registered at Police Station Frezarpur,
District Bastar as well as the impugned order dated
02.05.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bastar at Jagdalpur bearing Civil Suit
No.04A/2024, be quashed.
Learned State counsel concurs the submissions
made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
Considering the submissions advanced by learned
counsel for the petitioner, list this case on 22.05.2025 in
order to enable the private respondent No.2 to appear in
person or through the counsel for her choice physically
or virtually, if she wishes.
List the case on 22.05.2025.
Learned State counsel shall communicate this
order to the private respondent No.2 for necessary
information and compliance, forthwith.
In view of the above, I.A. No.02, application for
urgent hearing during summer vacation stands
disposed of.
Sd/- Sd/- -
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Judge
Yogesh
