[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Gayatri Jaiswal vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12859-DB
Digitally signed by
INDRAJEET INDRAJEET SAHU NAFR
SAHU Date: 2026.03.19
17:36:50 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPCR No. 148 of 2026
1 - Gayatri Jaiswal W/o Vinod Jaiswal Aged About 34 Years R/o Jaijaipur,
Police Station - Jaijaipur, District - Sakti, Chhattisgarh.
... Petitioner(s)
Versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Home Affairs,
Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2 - The Director General of Police Police Headquaters (PHQ), Nava Raipur,
Atal Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3 - The Inspector General of Police Bilaspur Range, Bilaspur, District -
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
4 - The Superintendent Of Police District - Sakti, Chhattisgarh.
5 - The Station House Officer Police Station Sakti, District - Sakti,
Chhattisgarh.
6 - Amarnath Sahu S/o Phoolsay Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Khursura,
Police Station Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner : Shri Shantam Awasthy, Advocate.
For State : Shri S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ramesh Sinha, CJ
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Order on Board
18.03.2026
Per, Ramesh Sinha, CJ.
1 The petitioner has filed this petition with the following prayer/reliefs:
"(i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
order, or direction, commanding the Respondent Authorities to
immediately execute the arrest of the private respondent,
Amarnath Sahu, in connection with FIR No. 0031/2026 registered
at Police Station Sakti for offenses punishable under Sections
64(2)(m) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
(ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent
Authorities to provide immediate and adequate police protection
to the Petitioner and her family members to ensure their safety
from the ongoing threats and criminal intimidation.
(iii) Monitor the progress of the investigation through the
mechanism of Continuing Mandamus, requiring the Respondent
Police to submit periodic status reports before this Hon'ble Court
to ensure the integrity of the probe and to prevent any further
institutional apathy or bias.
(iv) Award the costs of the petition in favor of the Petitioner and
against the Respondent Authorities for their manifest negligence
and dereliction of statutory duties.
(v) Pass any other such order or relief as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the interest of justice, equity, and good
conscience."
2 Brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner who is a victim of offence
of rape allegedly suffered by the act of respondent No.6, has filed this
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a direction to
the police authorities to immediately arrest the respondent No.6 and to
properly investigate into the matter. It is pleaded in the writ petition that
on her report, an FIR of Crime No.31 of 2026 has been registered
against the respondent No.6 at Police Station Sakti for the offence
under Sections 64(2)(m) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023. FIR was registered
on 23.01.2026, however, there is no substantial progress in the
investigation of the case and the respondent No.6 is left free by the
police authorities. By the passive act of the police authorities, the
respondent No.6 intimidating her for withdrawal of her complaint. The
respondent No.6 is an accused in a cognizable offence and he should
be arrested without warrant. Since he is coercing the petitioner for
withdrawal of her complaint, immediate action is required to be taken
against him by the police authorities. The petitioner has made
complaint to Superintendent of Police on 12.02.2026 about
threatening given to her by the respondent No.6 and his family
members and on 16.02.2026 to the Inspector General of Police,
Bilaspur Range, however, no action have been taken against
respondent No.6 by the police authorities and therefore interference of
this court for due, effective and immediate investigation of the FIR is
necessary for which the petitioner has filed this present writ petition.
3 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that after lodging FIR
by her on 23.01.2026 no substantial progress in the investigation has
been carried out by the police authorities and the respondent No.6 and
his family members are regularly giving threatening to her for
withdrawal of her complaint. Due to conduct of respondent No.6 as well
as inaction on the part of police authorities, the authorities may be
directed to take immediate steps to arrest the respondent No.6 and to
investigate the matter in a fair and proper manner without any further
delay. The complaint made by the petitioner have also not been taken
care by the higher police authorities and she suspects any untoward
incident at any point of time. Therefore, the authorities may be directed
as prayed in the present writ petition.
4 We have heard the counsel for the petitioner and perused the material
annexed with the petition.
5 From perusal of FIR it transpires that offence under Sections 64(2)(m)
and 351(2) of BNS, 2023 have been registered on 23.01.2026 against
the respondent No.6 on the complaint made by the petitioner. After
registration of FIR, the matter is still under investigation. Any direction
with respect to carrying out investigation in any particular manner by
this court would prejudice fair and independent investigation by the
police authorities. Once the FIR is registered, the police is legally
bound to investigate the matter which includes visiting the crime scene,
collecting evidence and recording statements, however, registration of
FIR does not make the arrest of an accused mandatory and police
cannot be directed to arrest someone immediately solely because FIR
has been filed. Arrest is a coercive step that must be justified, and it is
not an automatic consequence of registering FIR. Further, one can not
loose sight of the fact that an allegation of sexual abuse casts serious
aspersions on the character of the person made accused and affects
his reputation.
6 Thus, at this stage, this court does not find any good ground to
entertain the writ petition for the relief claimed by the petitioner. The
petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
inder
