2026:CGHC:8052 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1195 of 2019 Manoj Kumar Chaudhary S/o Shri Kharpattu Chaudhary Aged About 36 Years R/o Old Fish Market, Supela, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Magistrate, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

2 - Jeevanlal Sahu S/o Keshav Sahu Aged About 41 Years R/o Kurud Basti, House No. 149, Near Sheetala Mandir, Bhilai, Tahsil And District-

Durg, Chhattisgarh.

3 - Anil Kumar Choubey S/o Late Lakhanlal Choubey Aged About 46 Years R/o Ekta Chowk Kailash Nagar, Industrial Area, Kurud, Bhilai, Tahsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

4 - Ravishankar Sahu S/o Punit Ram Sahu Aged About 39 Years R/o Ekta Chowk, Kailash Nagar, Indusrial Area, Kurud, Bhilai, Tahsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

5 - Anil Banjare S/o Dharamdas Banjare Aged About 30 Years R/o Kurud District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

6 - Krishna Kumar Gupta S/o Late Kedar Nath Gupta Aged About 50 Years R/o Kailash Nagar, Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

7 - Smt. Digeshwari Sahu W/o Jeevanlal Sahu Aged About 38 Years R/o Kurud Basti, Near Sheetla Mandir, Bhilai, Tahsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

8 - Rajesh Mishra Stamp Vendor, Tahsil Parisar, Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Kabeer Kalwani, Advocate.

RAHUL

DEWANGAN For Respondent No. 01/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer

Digitally

signed by

RAHUL

DEWANGAN

Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

13.02.2026

1. Heard Mr. Kabeer Kalwani, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Ankita Shukla, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No. 01/State.

2. By this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 (for short, the Cr.P.C.) the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 15.01.2019 passed by the learned fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) passed in Criminal Revision No. 77/2018, arising out of the order dated 02.04.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg, whereby the application preferred by the petitioner under Section

156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure had been rejected.

3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner application under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. stating that land bearing Khasra No. 151 situated at Village Kurud, P.H. No. 14/19, was recorded in the name of respondent No. 2, who executed an agreement to sell dated 19.05.2015 in favour of the petitioner after receiving Rs.1,00,000/- through cheque. Despite repeated requests, respondent No. 2 failed to execute the sale deed, compelling the petitioner to submit an application before the Tehsildar, Bhilai, on 10.06.2015 seeking restriction on supply of revenue records to third parties. However, respondent Nos. 3 and 4, having knowledge of the said agreement, executed a sale deed dated 04.09.2015 regarding the same land, whereupon the petitioner instituted Civil Suit No. 24-A/2016 before the District Judge, Durg, seeking specific performance and declaration of the said sale deed as null and void. During the proceedings, the petitioner discovered another agreement dated 10.04.2015 and, upon enquiry from the stamp vendor, found that the thumb impression recorded in the register did not belong to respondent No. 2, indicating fraud and impersonation by respondent Nos. 3 to

8.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a criminal complaint before the learned Magistrate alleging offences under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate called for a police report, recorded statements of the petitioner and witnesses, and, after considering the material on record, dismissed the application vide order dated 02.04.2018 on the ground that the civil Court, by judgment and decree dated 13.12.2017 in Civil Suit No. 24-A/2016, upheld the sale deed in favour of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and, therefore, no prima facie criminal case was made out.

5. The petitioner preferred a crim