Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 7051
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Bibhu Datta Guru, J
Deep @ Ayush Sinha – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRMP No. 1822 of 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Neeraj Kumar Mehta
For the Respondents: Mr. Malay Jain, Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Ms. Hamida Siddiqui
Quashing of FIRs should be exercised sparingly; investigation required unless no cognizable offence is disclosed.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 428 - Quashing of FIR - Petitioner sought to quash FIR for alleged gambling under Chhattisgarh Gambling Prohibition Act, 2022 - Petitioner argued infringement of liberty without evidence of guilt - The court emphasized that quashing should be approached sparingly and only in rare situations, affirming that the decision to investigate must be logical. (Paras 3, 5, 9)
(B) Quashing and Investigation - Though courts can quash FIRs, they must not evaluate merits prematurely - Allegations do establish a cognizable offence requiring investigation under the law. (Paras 7, 9)
Facts of the case:
Petitioner accused of involvement in illegal gambling, asserting false implication by police due to prior complaints against police personnel. Allegations remain unsubstantiated, leading to petition for quashing of FIR.
Findings of Court:
No evidence shows that FIR lacks merit affecting the need for investigation, leading to refusal of petitioner’s plea.
Issues: The legitimacy of allegations in FIR versus the petitioner’s complaints against police personnel and their resultant implications.
Ratio Decidendi: Power to quash is confined to determining allegations; courts do not pursue merits prematurely unless facts strictly warrant such action.
Result: Petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing of both parties on implications of fir. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. allegations of illegal gambling and petitioner's defense. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's approach to quashing fir based on jurisdictional power. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. standards for interference in fir under code of criminal procedure. (Para 8) |
| 5. final decision on dismissal of the petition. (Para 9) |
Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
30.06.2025
1. Heard Mr. Neeraj Kumar Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Also heard Mr. Malay Jain, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondent Nos.1 to 5, Mr. Rishabh Gupta, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 6 and Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos. 8, 9 &
10.
2. The present petition under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers :-
“It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to:
1. allow this petition, 2. call for entire records from the respondent authorities concerned relating to registration of Crime No. 0182/2023, 3. quash the FIR dated 25/05/2023 bearing Crime No.0182 registered at Police Station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinangar), District Ambikapur (Surguja), C.G. against the petitioner for offence punishable under Sections 7 & 8 of Chhattisgarh Gambling Prohibition Act , 2022, 4. to direct the Respondent No.01 to constitute Special Investigating Team (SIT) to investigate into the matter regarding the report made by the petitioner to the higher authorities, and submit report to the Hon'ble High Court for its kind perusal, 5. to direct the Respondent authorities concerned to give protection to the Petitioner to save his life and liberty from the illegal activities of the Police concerned, 6. to pass any other order / direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.”
3. Prosecution story, in brief, is that Respondent No.6 had lodged a report against the petitioner and other accused persons on 25/05/2023, alleging therein that an information received through informer that under the police station Gandhi Nagar area online and offline State level illegal widespread business of gambling on IPL match is being operated by one Tunna @ Mritunjay Singh in connivance with the co-accused persons namely Saurabh Mishra, Deep @ Ayush Sinha (Petitioner), Ravi Patel, Niraj Tigga, Hazari @ Sandeep and Ashu @ Akash Agrawal and they are encouraging the gaming slips (Satta Patti) in the area with the help of Sky Exchange Online Company. On the date of FIR i.e. on
25/05/2023, Ashu Agrawal and Arjun Yadav after collecting money from the local people, they were planning to handover the amount to Tunna @ Mrityunjay Singh. At that time, on information received, a raid was conducted and from Arjun Yadav and Akash Agrawal @ Ashu Gambling Slips, Mobile and cash were recovered. Hence, this petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the lodging of the FIR is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the law applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. The Petitioner is innocent and falsely implicated in the instant case by the concerned respondents, there is no criminal background of the Petitioner. He further argued that the Petitioner herein before registration of FIR had moved an application before the Inspector General and Superintendent of Police, Surguja Ambikapur, stating therein that some of the police personnel have created illegal pressure upon him to run a Satta business and on being denied, threat is being extended to inculpate him in a false case like before and the petitioner has also received threats of running a case against him after 10-15 days of commencement of IPL match. The Petitioner had requested the authorities to save him from any false & fabricated criminal case, however, despite the applications moved by him before the Inspector General and Superintendent of Police
