[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Basant Agrawal @ Lambu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12842-DB
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRMP No. 784 of 2026
ROHIT
Basant Agrawal @ Lambu S/o Late Shri Hetram Agrawal Aged About 53
KUMAR
CHANDRA
Digitally signed
Years R/o Nehruchowk,ward No.05,baradwar, Police Station-Baradwar,
by ROHIT
KUMAR
CHANDRA
District-Sakti(C.G.)
... Petitioner
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station
Sakti, District-Sakti (C.G.)
... Respondent
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Petitioner : Mr. Akhand Pratap Pandey, Advocate
For Respondent/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur,
Additional Advocate General
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge
Order on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
18.03.2026
1. Heard Mr. Akhand Pratap Pandey, learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Additional
Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondent.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section
528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita with the following
prayers :-
"(i) Quash and set aside the Charge-Sheet No.
149/2023, insofar as it relates to the present petitioner,
filed for the alleged offences punishable under Sections
420, 409, 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
arising out of FIR No. 149/2019 dated 24.03.2019
registered at Police Station Sakti, District Sakti
(Chhattisgarh).
(ii) Quash and set aside the order of cognizance
dated 23.06.2022, insofar as it relates to the present
petitioner, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Sakti, in Criminal Case No. 714/2023,
District Sakti (Chhattisgarh).
(iii) Quash the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal
Case No. 714/2023 between parties State of C.G. Vs
Gaurishankar Agrawal pending before the Court of the
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sakti, District Sakti
(Chhattisgarh) insofar as it relates to the present
petitioner namely Basant Agrawal@ Lambu.
(iv) Pass any other order(s) or direction(s) which this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the registered
owner of truck bearing registration No. CG-04 JA-9821, which
was regularly attached to M/s Gaurishankar Agrawal's Rice Mill
for transportation of paddy and rice. The case arises from a
complaint lodged by the District Marketing Officer, alleging
irregularities in the transportation of paddy from the Sakti Paddy
Procurement Centre. During an inspection on 15.03.2019, the
petitioner's truck was found carrying approximately 500 bags of
paddy, allegedly on the basis of a delivery memo suspected to
have been reused. Based on the complaint, FIR No. 149/2019
dated 24.03.2019 was registered at Police Station Sakti under
Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against four
persons, including the petitioner. During investigation, the truck
was intercepted, found loaded with 500 bags of paddy allegedly
sourced from the procurement centre, and was subsequently
seized by the authorities. During course of investigation,
statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completion
of investigation, charge-sheet bearing No. 149/2023 was
submitted before the Court of Court of Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Sakti on 21.06.2023 under Section 420, 409, 120-B, 34 of
IPC against 4 accused persons including the petitioner and the
learned Magistrate has already taken cognizance vide order dated
22.06.2023 (wrongly mentioned as 22.06.2022), however,
charges have not been framed till date. Hence, this petition with
the aforementioned prayers.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Petitioner
has been falsely implicated solely on account of being the
registered owner of the vehicle, without any material connecting
him to the alleged offence. There is no statement, document, or
evidence on record indicating his involvement, knowledge, or
participation in the alleged act. He further submitted that the
investigation is defective, as the memorandum statement of the
driver, being the most material witness, has not been recorded.
Further, none of the witnesses examined during investigation
have named or implicated the Petitioner in any manner. He also
submitted that there is no confession, recovery, or documentary
evidence against the Petitioner. Despite this, the charge-sheet
has been filed in a mechanical manner without any substantive
material, which amounts to abuse of the process of law, hence, he
prayed that the proceedings be quashed in the interest of justice.
5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the petition and
submitted that the present petition is devoid of merit and liable to
be dismissed. It is contended that the allegations made in the FIR
and the material collected during investigation clearly disclose
commission of cognizable offences, and at this stage, only a
prima facie case is required to be seen. It is further submitted that
the truck owned by the Petitioner was found transporting a large
quantity of paddy under suspicious circumstances on the basis of
a delivery memo suspected to have been misused, thereby
establishing a prima facie link with the alleged offence. He also
submitted that after due investigation, the charge-sheet was filed
on 21.06.2023 and the learned trial Court has already taken
cognizance of the offences on 23.06.2023. However, the
Petitioner is deliberately avoiding appearance before the trial
Court, and for this reason, charges have not been framed till date.
It is further contended that the grounds raised by the Petitioner
pertain to disputed questions of fact and defence, which cannot
be adjudicated at this stage and are required to be examined
during trial, hence, no interference is warranted and the petition
deserves to be dismissed.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
materials placed on record.
7. From the record, it is evident that the FIR was registered on the
basis of a complaint alleging irregularities in transportation of
paddy, and during investigation, the truck owned by the Petitioner
was found involved in the alleged offence. After completion of
investigation, charge-sheet has already been filed on 21.06.2023
and the learned trial Court has taken cognizance of the offences
on 23.06.2023. The submissions advanced on behalf of the
Petitioner primarily relate to disputed questions of fact, including
lack of evidence and alleged defects in investigation, which
cannot be examined at this stage. The same are matters to be
considered by the trial Court during the course of trial. It is also
noted that the Petitioner has not appeared before the trial Court,
and charges have not been framed till date for that reason.
8. In view of the aforesaid reasons, no case for interference is made
out. Accordingly, the petition being devoid of merit is hereby
dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Chandra
