[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Rooplal Verma vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 15 April, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:17047
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRMP No. 1045 of 2026
1 - Rooplal Verma S/o Suresh Verma, Aged About 33 Years R/o
Village Gadadih, PS And Tehsil Khairagarh, District Khairagarh
Chhuikhandan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Superintendent Of Police,
Khairagarh, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai,
Chhattisgarh
2 - The Station House Officer, Police Station Khairagarh, District
Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh. (Prosecution)
... Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Ujjawal Agrawal, Adv.
For State : Mr. Anish Tiwari, Dy. G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Order on Board
15/04/2026
1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under
Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, seeking for the issuance of an
appropriate direction to respondent authorities to consider
and decide the objection dated 11.03.2026 (Annexure -
P/2) filed by the petitioner and further to conduct a fair
and propr investigation in the matter.
Digitally
signed by
HEERA HEERA
LAL SAHU
LAL Date:
SAHU 2026.04.15
17:26:48
+0530
2. Brief facts of the case were that, on 08.03.2026, deceased
Tularam Patel, a building contractor, went to the village
Gadadih to drop off one Pardeshnin Bai on his motorcycle
at about 10:40 pm. The accused persons namely, Kirtan
Yadav, Samay Yadav, Ashish Yadav, Paltan Verma, Rooplal
Verma (petitioner), Pawan Verma, Ramchand Verma and
Lokesh Yadav and other associates, acting in furtherance of
their common intention, wrongfully restrained the deceased
and assaulted him using hands, fists, legs, sticks and
sleepers on the pretext that his visits were adversely
affecting the village environment. Due to the said assault,
the deceased sustained grievous injuries to his head. He
was immediately taken to the hospital, where he was
declared dead by the doctor. Based on this, FIR bearing
Crime No. 107/2026 was registered at Police Station
Khairagarh, District - Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai for
the alleged offence against the accused persons.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submits that on
11.03.2026, an objection application was filed by the
petitioner's father before respondent No. 1 (Superintendent
of Police), stating that on the date of the incident i.e.
08.03.2026 at about 7:25 pm, upon hearing a commotion
in the village regarding the alleged assault on the deceased
Tularam Patel, the present petitioner reached the spot
where several villagers had already gathered and found the
deceased lying on the ground. However, prior thereto, the
deponent and his son had already closed their hotel at
Sandi Chouk, at about 7:00 pm, and reached home, and
thus he was not present at the time of the alleged assault.
It was further stated that the petitioner neither witnessed
nor participated in any assault and, after briefly being at
the spot, returned and informed village elders, following
which, on noticing the deteriorating condition of the
deceased, he himself dialled 112, reflecting his bona fide
conduct. The deceased Tularam Patel was subsequently
taken to the hospital, where he died. Thus, the implication
of the petitioner is therefore, wholly false, baseless, and
without any supporting evidence, as his presence was after
the incident and limited to assisting in informing
authorities and considering also that the deceased was
under the influence of alcohol and in the company of
Pardeshnin Bai, the petitioner has been wrongly implicated
and prayed for the deletion of the name of the present
petitioner from the aforesaid FIR (copy of the application
dated 11.03.2026 is annexed herein as (Annexure-P/2). He
placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the matter of Babubhai vs. State of Gujarat, (2010) 12
SCC 254 and submits that fair investigation is a
constitutional mandate and the procedure must be just,
fair and reasonable, and not arbitrary, thereby making fair
investigation an integral part of Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. Therefore, he prayed to direct the
respondent authorities to consider and decide the objection
dated 11.03.2026 (Annexure-P/2) filed on behalf of the
petitioner and further pleased to direct the respondents to
conduct a fair and proper investigation in the matter, in the
interest of justice.
4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the arguments
advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner
and submits that since there is no obligation to dispose of
such an application during the course of the investigation,
issuing such a direction would be neither necessary nor
appropriate.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
the documents annexed with the petition.
6. Looking to the prayer sought by the counsel for the
petitioner, it appears that the petitioner prays to direct the
respondents to consider and decide the objection dated
11.03.2026 filed on behalf of the petitioner and further
directs the respondents to conduct a fair and proper
investigation in the matter.
7. Section 528 (corresponding to Section 482 of the CrPC) is
engrafted to allow the High Court to intervene in cases
where there is a clear abuse of process or where it is
necessary to prevent injustice. Looking to the facts and
circumstances of the case, in the case in hand, I am not
inclined to use inherent power under Section 528 of BNSS.
8. Accordingly, in view of the above, the petition is dismissed
at motion stage itself.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
Judge
H.L. Sahu
