[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Fatte Lal Shau vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 1 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:14945-DB
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRMP No. 911 of 2026
1 - Fatte Lal Shau S/o Shri Tika Ram Sahu Aged About 41 Years
Resident of Karma Vihar Moti, Nagar Behind Ram Mandir, Old,
Dhamtari Road, P.S. Tikrapara Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh
ROHIT
2 - Pratima Sahu W/o Shri Fattelal Sahu Aged About 36 Years Resident
KUMAR
CHANDRA of Karma Vihar, Moti Nagar, Behind Ram Mandir, Old Dhamtari Road,
Digitally
signed by
ROHIT KUMAR
P.S. Tikrapara Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh,
CHANDRA
... Petitioners
versus
1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police
Station Mahila Thana, District- Raipur, Commissionerate Chhattisgarh,
(As Per F.I.R.)
2 - Smt. Aarti Sahu D/o Parmeshwar Sahu , W/o Shri Manish Sahu
Aged About 25 Years R/o Mahavir Chowk, Dumartarai District- Raipur
Chhattisgarh,
... Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advocate
For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge
Order on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
01.04.2026
1. Heard Mr. Sandeep Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioners as
well as Mr. Shailendra Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing
for the State/respondents.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following relief(s):-
"It is therefore prayed that, this Hon'ble Court may
kindly be pleased to allow the instant petition and quashed
the First Information Report bearing Crime No. 34/2026
registered in Police Station Mahila Thana, District Raipur
Collectorate under Section 85 of BNS, 2023 against the
petitioner no. 1 (Fatte Lal Sahu) & 2 (Pratima Sahu)
(Annexure-P/1) in the interest of justice."
3. Brief facts of the case are that a report was lodged by the
respondent No. 2/complainant at Police Station Mahila Thana,
District Raipur, alleging inter-alia that, her marriage with Manish
Sahu (Brother of petitioner No. 2) took place on 18/04/2024
according to Hindu Rituals. It was further stated that for about 1
month after the marriage, she was treated well and after that,
complainant's husband started abusing and beating her daily after
drinking alcohol. Her father-in-law deceived her by telling her to go
and live at her parents' house and left her there and till date, he
has not come to take her and she is staying at her parents' house
and on 07/10/2025 the complainant came to know that her
husband had kept a girl named Seema Chandel as his wife and
had a child born in the hospital of village Navagarh. Thus, under a
well-planned conspiracy, her husband, mother-in-law, father-in-
law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law and brother-in-law got the
above marriage done with her while her husband was having an
illicit relationship with a girl. Her husband Manish Sahu has a child
born from his illicit relationship with a girl. Therefore, she lodge
complaint against the husband and his family member including
the petitioner No.1 1 & 2 alleging that they started verbally
abusing her with derogatory terms and saying that she does not
work and also demanding money from her parental house and
physically assaulting her. Basically, the allegations were made
with respect to demand of dowry and treating her with cruelty. It
was also alleged that they tried to cause her death by beating her.
On the basis of report lodged by the complainant/respondent
No.2, the Police Station Mahila Thana District Raipur
Commissionerate registered an offence bearing Crime Ne
34/2026 for the offence punishable under Section 85 of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on 09.03.2026 and investigation was
initiated. Hence, this petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations
made against the present petitioners are vague, general, and
omnibus in nature, lacking any specific instances, dates, or overt
acts attributable to them. He further submitted that the petitioners
have been falsely implicated merely by virtue of their relationship
with the husband, without any cogent material to establish their
involvement in the alleged acts of cruelty or dowry demand. He
also submitted that the FIR does not disclose any prima facie
case against the petitioners, and their implication appears to be
an abuse of the process of law, therefore, continuation of the
criminal proceedings against the present petitioners is
unwarranted and liable to be quashed.
5. Per contra, learned State counsel submitted that the FIR discloses
commission of cognizable offences and contains specific
allegations of cruelty, physical assault, and demand of dowry
against the accused persons, including the present petitioners.
The complainant has clearly stated that after a brief period of
normal matrimonial life, she was subjected to continuous
harassment, abuse, and physical violence by her husband and his
family members. It is further alleged that she was deceitfully
abandoned at her parental home and later discovered that her
husband was already involved in an illicit relationship and had a
child, indicating that the marriage itself was solemnized under
concealment of material facts as part of a larger conspiracy
involving the family members. The allegations also include
demand of money from her parental home and attempts to cause
her death by physical assault. He further submitted that at this
stage, the veracity and truthfulness of these allegations cannot be
examined in proceedings under inherent jurisdiction, as the matter
requires thorough investigation. The role of each accused,
including the petitioners, is a matter of evidence to be determined
during trial. The FIR and accompanying material prima facie
disclose the ingredients of the alleged offence under Section 85 of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and therefore, no case for
quashing is made out.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of
the record, this Court finds that the FIR, on its plain reading,
discloses specific allegations of cruelty, physical assault, and
demand of dowry against the accused persons, including the
present petitioners. The complainant has categorically alleged
continuous harassment, abuse, and ill-treatment at the hands of
her husband and his family members, as well as concealment of
material facts regarding the husband's prior relationship, which
prima facie indicates a larger conspiracy. At this stage, this Court
cannot embark upon an appreciation of evidence or adjudicate
upon the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations made in the
complaint. The contentions raised by the petitioners regarding
false implication, vagueness of allegations, and separate
residence are matters of defence, which can be appropriately
examined during the course of investigation or trial. The FIR and
material on record disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged
offence under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,
and therefore, no case is made out for exercise of inherent
powers to quash the proceedings.
7. Accordingly, the petition being devoid of merit is dismissed
leaving it open for the petitioners to take recourse to law.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Chandra
