2026:CGHC:2755 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1468 of 2022

1 - Lakhan Singh Thakur @ Lakhan S/o Lt. Kuber Singh Thakur Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Pahanda, Tahsil Patan, Police Station Amleshwar, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

2 - Yashwant Singh Thakur @ Ravi Singh S/o Lakhan Singh Thakur Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Pahanda, Tahsil Patan, Police Station Amleshwar, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2 - The Station House Officer Police Station Amleshwar, Patan, District :

Durg, Chhattisgarh

3 - Lakhan Ram Sahu (Deleted) Through Lrs. As Per Honble Court Order Dated 10-10-2022, 20-11-2024 And 27-11-2024.

3.1 - (A) Smt. Ganeshiya Sahu W/o Late Lakhan Ram Sahu, R/o Village-Pahanda, Tehsil-Patan, P.S.-Amleshwar, District-Durg (C.G.)

490042.

4 - (Deleted) Aalen Singh Sahu S/o Chamru Ram Sahu (Died) Through Lrs. As Per Honble Court Order Dated 20-11-2024 And 27-11-2024.

(Deleted As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 06-01-2025) 4.1 - (A) Punit Sahu S/o Late Aalen Singh Sahu, Aged About 53 Years R/o Village-Pahanda, Tehsil Patan, P.S.-Amleshwar, District-Durg (C.G.)

490042.

4.2 - (B) Keshav Sahu S/o Late Aalen Singh Sahu, Aged About 53 Years R/o Village-Pahanda, Tehsil Patan, P.S.-Amleshwar, District-Durg (C.G.)

490042.

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Samdarsh Nirankari, Advocate.

For Respondents : Ms. Vaishali Mahilang, Gy. G.A.

No.1 and 2/State For Respondents : Mr. Chetan Singh Chauhan, Advocate.

No.4A & 4B Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

16/01/2026

1. Heard Mr. Samdarsh Nirankari, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Also heard Ms. Vaishali Mahilang, learned Dy. G.A. appearing for respondents No.1 and 2/State as well as Mr. Chetan Singh Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.4A and

4B.

2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following relief:

“i. That the entire records pertaining to the present case may kindly be called for the perusal of this Hon'ble Court ii. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 17/08/2022 passed by the learned 1 Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, in criminal revision no. 142/2022, refusing to set aside the order framing charges under sections 420/34, 465, 467 of the IPC, passed by the learned JMFC, Bhilai-3, Durg, in criminal 226/2018 vide order dated 17/06/2022, and therefore, all the resultant criminal proceedings, in the interest of Justice.

iii. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interests of Justice, may be awarded.”

3. Brief facts of the present case, as stated by the petitioners, are that the learned trial Court has erroneously framed charges against the petitioners without properly appreciating the material on record. It is contended that, as per the prosecution case itself, the allegations are baseless, as there is no evidence to show that, without any permission or order of the Revenue Department, the petitioners got the land situated at Village Pahanda, P.H.N. No. 4, Khasra No. 323, Rakba 1.81 hectares, mutated in their names by forging or tampering with documents, whereas the said land was alleged to be government grass land. It is further stated that no material evidence has been produced to demonstrate as to how petitioner No.2 got the land mutated in his name and, therefore, no offence is made out against him. The learned trial Court failed to consider that, insofar as the alleged forgery of documents is concerned, the said documents were never in possession of the petitioners and, accordingly, the offences under Sections 465 and 467 IPC are not attracted. It is also contended that no confessional statement has been made against the petitioners, yet the learned trial Court has passed the impugned order.

4. The petitioners further submit that petitioner No.2 was a minor at the relevant time and there is no alle