2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 6282
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
GURDEEP SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
CRMP/4/2026
2026:CGHC:1076 NAFR INDRAJEET INDRAJEET SAHU HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SAHU Date: 2026.02.11
10:27:25 +0530 CRMP No. 4 of 2026
1 - Gurdeep Singh S/o Late Shri Keshar Singh, Aged About 68 Years Occupation- Dairy Business, R/o- Railnagar, Charoda, P.S.H.- Old Bhilai 3, Tehsil Bhilai, District, Durg, Chhattisgarh.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S.H. Old Bhilai District Durg, Chhattisgarh.
2 - Shri Dilip Hinduja, S/o Shri Tikam Das Hinduja, Aged About 58 Years, R/o New Shanti Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, P.S.H.- Civil Lines, Raipur, Tehsil and District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner : Shri Ashok Verma, Sr. Advocate along with Shri Gajendra Sahu, Advocate.
For State : Shri Ashish Shukla, Additional Advocate General.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Order on Board
07.01 . 202 6
1. The present Criminal Misc. Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, against the impugned order dated 13.11.2025 passed by the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, in Criminal Revision No.47/2025 whereby the said Criminal Revision filed by the respondent No.2-Dilip Hinduja was allowed and the order dated 07.12.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhilai-3, District Durg, in Criminal Case No.663/2014 was set aside.
2. The subject matter in brief is that, an FIR of Crime No.120/2013 was registered at Police Station, Old Bhilai, District Durg, for the offence under Sections 420,467,468,471, 34 IPC against the present petitioner Gurdeep Singh, co-accused Mohd. Shakeel Khan and Keshari Begum. After investigation, charge sheet was filed on 02.08.2014 against the co-accused persons Shakeel Khan and Keshari Begum stating no sufficient evidence was found against the present petitioner Gurdeep Singh during investigation and since the co-accused Keshari Begum was absconding, charge sheet was filed only against Shakeel Khan. It was the allegation in the complaint made by the complainant Dilip Hinduja that the present petitioner along with other co-accused persons prepared forged Rin Pustika and power of attorney and got the land of Khasra Nos. 462/2 & 463/2 situated at village Charoda, District Durg, transferred in the name of co-accused in between 30.11.1994 and 24.02.2012. Initially charge sheet was filed against the co-accused Shakeel Khan and subsequently when the co-accused Keshari Begum was arrested, supplementary charge sheet was filed against her on 26.03.2016. Further, another supplementary charge sheet was filed against the present petitioner on 12.08.2024 for the offence under Sections 420,464,467,468,471, 34 IPC along with Section 120-B IPC. On 17.09.2024 an application was filed by the present petitioner under Section 91 CrPC for directing the police authorities to produce the relevant documents of Revenue Case No.78/B-121/2017-18 and the report of Naib Tehsildar dated 18.01.2018 and 12.07.2019. The trial court directed the prosecution to produce the documents of letter dated 03.12.2017 written to Naib Tehsildar by Police Station Old Bhiali, report of the Naib Tehsildar dated 27.12.2017, stay order dated 18.01.2018 and the amended order dated 12.07.2019. The prosecution took time repeatedly to comply with the order dated 17.09.2024 and the certified copies of the relevant documents in compliance of the order dated 17.09.2024 was produced by the prosecution on 20.11.2024. Thereafter, the matter was being heard on the issue of framing charge against the petitioner Gurdeep Singh and after recording submissions of the parties, on 07.12.2024 the petitioner Gurdeep Singh was discharged from the offence under Sections 420,467,468,471, 34 and
120-B of IPC.
3. The said order of discharge of the petitioner Gurdeep Singh was challenged by the complainant Dilip Hinduja before the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, in Criminal Revision No.47/2025. The said Criminal Revision was allowed vide order dated 13.11.2025 and the order passed by the trial court