2026:CGHC:7888 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPCR No. 5 of 2026

1 - Balkrishna Jangde S/o Late Brijlal Jangde Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Temri, P.S. Nandghat, District Bemetara, Presently H.I.G. 1 /13 Pirda Housing Board, P.S. Vidhansabha, District Raipur, C.G.

2 - Anjana Jangde W/o Balkrishna Jangde Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Temri, P.S. Nandghat, District Bemetara, Presently H.I.G. 1 /13 Pirda Housing Board, P.S. Vidhansabha, District Raipur, C.G.

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Police Station Tilda Nevra, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G.

2 - X Y Z Nil ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Renu Kochar, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1/State. : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

12/02/2026

1. Heard Ms. Renu Kochar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Palak Dwivedi, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No.1/State.

2. The present petition under Section 447 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”) seeks transfer of Session Trial No. 235/2021 from the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC), Raipur (C.G.) to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.).

3. Brief facts according to the petitioners are that the present case arises out of a written complaint lodged by Khilendra Kumar Verma on 15.03.2021 at Police Station Tilda Nevra, registered as Crime No. 109/2021 under Sections 307, 454 and 354 of the IPC against an unknown person. It was alleged that on the same day at about 11:45 AM, an unknown person entered the house of the victim, threatened her at knife point with intent to sexually assault her and caused injuries. The victim was taken to the hospital, and the FIR was accordingly registered. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the present petitioner and others. The learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raipur took cognizance and framed charges under Sections 307, 454, 354, 376, 376(2)(n), 120-B, 201 and 34 IPC. The prosecution cited 30 witnesses. During trial, certain prosecution witnesses were examined. It is alleged that procedural irregularities occurred, including examination of a subordinate employee in place of the Nodal Officer and alleged threats to the applicant within court premises on 14.01.2026. The applicant’s complaint regarding threats was allegedly not acted upon by the trial Court, whereas a complaint made by a prosecution witness was promptly forwarded for registration of a case. Out of 30 prosecution witnesses, 18 have been examined and 4 were given up. Only police witnesses remain to be examined. The applicant alleges irregularity in recording evidence, including examination of the Investigating Officer out of sequence and imposition of transportation expenses for a witness despite limited time for cross-examination.

4. It is further alleged that after the Special Public Prosecutor was relieved, the counsel for the victim was permitted to assist under Section 301(2) Cr.P.C., creating an apprehension of bias and prejudice to the accused. The opportunity to cross-examine an important witness (P.W.2 – the informant/husband of the victim) was initially curtailed, but later restored by this Court in Cr.M.P. No. 1737/2025. The applicant also alleges that statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were not properly recorded, adequate opportunity of hearing was not granted, and certain prosecution witnesses were issued warrants during pendency of cross- examination of other witnesses. It is further contended that CCTV footage allegedly relating to the incident was not properly shown to the accused, and that the footage was altered. The request to display the complete footage was allegedly denied. On these grounds, alleging bias, procedural irregularities and violation of principles of natural justice, the petitioner has filed a transfer petition seeking transfer of Sessions Trial No. 235/2021 pending before th