[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Ashish Singh Rathore vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 February, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
Digitally 2026:CGHC:9785-DB
signed by
ANURADHA
ANURADHA TIWARI NAFR
TIWARI Date:
2026.02.26
10:40:38
+0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRMP No. 585 of 2026
Ashish Singh Rathore S/o Late Raju Rathore Aged About 30 Years R/o
Saragaon, Tabaragudi, P.S. Saragaon, Distt.- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
... Petitioner
versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Home,
Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur
(Chhattisgarh)
2 - The Director General of Police Police Department, New Raipur,
District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Superintendent of Police Korba, District- Korba (Chhattisgarh)
4 - Station House Officer Police Station Civil Line, Rampur, Korba,
District- Korba (Chhattisgarh)
5 - Xyz Nil
... Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate
For Respondents-State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Deputy Government
Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge
Judgment on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
25.02.2026
1 Heard Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the
petitioner. Also heard Mr. Soumya Rai, learned Deputy
Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents No.1
to 4.
2 The petitioner has filed this petition praying for following reliefs:-
"1. That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to allow the instant petition under section 528
of B.N.S.S. 2023 filed by the petitioner, in the
interest of justice.
2. That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
quash the FIR bearing No. 601/2025 registered
on dated 29.09.2025 at police station Civil Line,
Rampur, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh
filed under section 69 of B.N.S. 2023 in the
interest of justice.
3. That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
16.11.2025 quash entire charge sheet dated
29.12.20 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Korba
Chhattisgarh under section 69 of B.N.S. 2023
in the interest of justice.
4. That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
quash cognizance taken by the learned Upper
Sessions Judge (F.T.C.) Korba Chhattisgarh, in
the interest of justice.
5. That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
quash entire criminal proceeding of Sessions
Trial No. 131/2025 pending before the learned
Upper Sessions Judge (F.T.C.) Korba
Chhattisgarh against the petitioner, in the
interest of justice.
6. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly grant any
other reliefs in favour of the petitioners, which
the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts
and circumstances of the case, in the interest
of justice"
3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire
prosecution story, even if taken at its face value, does not
constitute an offence under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023. It is contended that the relationship between the
petitioner and the complainant was admittedly consensual in
nature, as both parties were major, educated and fully aware of
the consequences of their actions. The complainant is serving as
a TGT (Hindi) Teacher at Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Odisha,
and the petitioner is employed in the office of the Assistant
Director, Gram Udyog, Raipur, presently posted at Korba. Their
acquaintance developed through Facebook, and the physical
relationship, as alleged, continued over a substantial period from
15.09.2024 to 19.07.2025. It is argued that such prolonged
association clearly indicates voluntary participation and mutual
consent, and the subsequent refusal to marry does not
automatically render the relationship an offence within the
meaning of Section 69 of the BNS, 2023.
4 It is further submitted that there is an inordinate and unexplained
delay in lodging the FIR. The alleged incidents occurred between
September, 2024 and July, 2025, whereas the FIR bearing Crime
No. 601/2025 was registered on 29.09.2025 at Police Station Civil
Line, Rampur, Korba. The delay, coupled with the admitted fact
that the complainant allegedly sent a threatening message to the
petitioner on 06.09.2025, demonstrates mala fide intent and an
afterthought. The petitioner had, in fact, approached Police
Station Akaltara apprehending false implication. Learned counsel
contends that the FIR appears to have been lodged out of anger
and personal dispute after the petitioner blocked the complainant
on social media, and not on account of any criminal act.
5 Learned counsel also submits that the investigation has been
conducted in a routine and mechanical manner without collection
of any cogent material to substantiate the allegation of false
promise of marriage from inception. No incriminating article has
been seized, and there is no material to demonstrate that at the
time of entering into the relationship the petitioner had no intention
to marry the complainant. Despite absence of foundational
ingredients constituting the offence, the charge-sheet has been
filed and charges have been framed in S.T. No. 131/2025 by the
learned Upper Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Korba. It is contended
that continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to
abuse of the process of Court, and therefore, the impugned FIR
and consequential proceedings deserve to be quashed.
6 On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the petition
and submits that the FIR and the material collected during
investigation clearly disclose the commission of an offence under
Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is contended
that the complainant has specifically alleged that the petitioner
established physical relations with her on the pretext of marriage
and continued to do so repeatedly from 15.09.2024 to 19.07.2025,
but ultimately refused to marry her. The allegation, taken at its
face value, prima facie indicates that the consent of the
complainant was obtained on a false promise of marriage, which
squarely attracts the ingredients of the offence.
7 Learned State counsel further submits that the investigation has
been completed, charge-sheet has been filed, and the learned
trial Court has already framed charges against the petitioner on
29.12.2025 in S.T. No. 131/2025. At this stage, when the trial is in
progress, this Hon'ble Court ought not to embark upon
appreciation of evidence or adjudicate disputed questions of fact
in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. The pleas raised by the
petitioner regarding consent, delay, and alleged mala fides are
matters of defence which can be tested during trial. It is thus
submitted that the petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be
dismissed, as no case for quashment of the FIR or charge-sheet
is made out.
8 We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and
perused the documents annexed with the present petition.
9 From perusal of the charge-sheet, it transpires that on the basis of
the written complaint lodged by the victim, Crime No. 601/2025
was registered at Police Station Civil Line, Rampur, Korba,
against accused Ashish Singh Rathore for the alleged offence
under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The
complainant has alleged that her acquaintance with the accused
developed through regular telephonic and social media
conversations, which gradually culminated in a relationship. It is
stated that the accused promised to marry her and, on such
assurance, established physical relations with her for the first time
on 15.09.2024 at Korba and thereafter continued to maintain
physical relations on several occasions, including at his rented
house situated at EWS Phase-2, Indraprastha, Sarona, Raipur.
The complainant has further alleged that despite repeated
assurances, the accused ultimately refused to marry her when
she insisted upon solemnization of marriage. The charge-sheet
reflects that during the course of investigation, the victim was
summoned and her detailed statement was recorded under
Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023. She was sent for medical examination to District Medical
Hospital, Korba, with her consent. The investigating agency
inspected the alleged place of occurrence, including the quarter at
CSEB Colony opposite the complainant's residence, prepared a
site map, and obtained a map report from the concerned Halka
Patwari through the Tehsildar, Korba. The Scene of Crime Unit,
Korba, also inspected the spot. The complainant produced a 34-
page verified copy of WhatsApp chat screenshots and medical
documents pertaining to her treatment at AIIMS, Raipur, which
were seized in presence of witnesses. Statements of other
relevant witnesses, including the complainant's friend, were also
recorded. It is further borne out from the charge-sheet that
attempts were made to apprehend the accused; however, upon
his non-availability, a non-appearance panchnama dated
30.10.2025 was prepared. The accused subsequently moved an
application for anticipatory bail before this Court, which was
allowed. In compliance with the Court's order, he was formally
arrested on 13.11.2025 at 7:10 PM and released on bail. After
completion of investigation, Charge-sheet No. 58/2025 was
prepared and submitted before the competent Court, which has
taken cognizance and proceeded in accordance with law.
10 Upon a comprehensive consideration of the rival submissions and
on perusal of the record, this Court finds that the FIR as well as
the charge-sheet disclose specific and categorical allegations
against the petitioner. The complainant has consistently stated
that the petitioner established physical relations with her on
repeated occasions on the pretext of marriage and subsequently
refused to marry her. The investigation reveals that her
statements were recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, her medical
examination was conducted, relevant electronic evidence
including WhatsApp chats was seized, the spot was inspected,
site map was prepared, and statements of material witnesses
were recorded. After completion of investigation, Charge-sheet
No. 58/2025 has been filed and the learned trial Court has already
framed charge under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 in S.T. No. 131/2025. Thus, the matter has moved beyond
the stage of mere allegations and entered into the realm of trial.
11 The contention of the petitioner that the relationship was
consensual, that there was delay in lodging the FIR, that the
complainant acted out of anger, and that no offence is made out,
are all matters which pertain to appreciation of evidence. Whether
the promise of marriage was genuine or false from inception;
whether the consent of the complainant was vitiated by
misconception of fact; whether the delay stands satisfactorily
explained; and whether the electronic record supports the
prosecution version -- all these are factual aspects which can
only be adjudicated upon during trial after evidence is led and
tested by cross-examination. This Court, in exercise of its inherent
jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC / 528 of the BNSS, cannot
conduct a mini-trial or undertake meticulous examination of
disputed questions of fact.
12 It is well settled that at the stage of quashment, the Court is
required to examine whether, assuming the allegations in the FIR
and charge-sheet to be true in their entirety, a prima facie offence
is made out. In the present case, the allegations, taken at face
value, prima facie satisfy the ingredients of Section 69 of the BNS,
2023. The submission that both parties were educated majors and
were in a consensual relationship is a defence available to the
petitioner, which is required to be proved at trial and cannot be
adjudicated conclusively in these proceedings. This Court also
notes that the petitioner has already been granted anticipatory
bail, and his liberty stands protected in accordance with law. The
continuation of the prosecution, therefore, cannot be termed as an
abuse of the process of Court. No exceptional circumstance has
been demonstrated warranting interference at this stage.
13 In view of the foregoing analysis, this Court is of the considered
opinion that the petitioner has failed to make out a case for
quashment of the FIR, charge-sheet or consequential
proceedings. The issues raised by the petitioner involve disputed
factual questions which must be adjudicated upon by the learned
trial Court on the basis of evidence led by the parties.
14 Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. It is, however,
clarified that any observations made herein are confined to the
adjudication of the present petition and shall not prejudice either
party during the course of trial, which shall proceed independently
and in accordance with law.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Anu
