SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 14186

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
AMAR SINGH RATHORE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
CRMP/275/2026



V PADMAVATHI Date: 2026.03.03 12:03:15 +0530

2026:CGHC:9812-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 275 of 2026

1 - Amar Singh Rathore S/o Sukhnandan Rathore Aged About 33 Years

2 - Sukhnandan Rathore S/o Radhelal Rathore Aged About 63 Years

3 - Ahilya W/o Sukhnandan Rathore Aged About 61 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Purani Basti, Sadak Para Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa C.G.

4 - Ajit Rathore S/o Sukhnandan Rathore Aged About 37 Years

5 - Rajani Rathore W/o Ajit Rathore Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Pathorta, Tahsil Itarsi, District Narmadapuram (M.P.)

6 - Anju Rathore W/o Naveen Rathore Aged About 36 Years

7 - Naveen Rathore S/o Hanuman Prasad Rathore Aged About 42 Years R/o Gurughasidas Ward Champa, District Janjgir-Champa C.G.

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa C.G.

2 - Smt. Archana Rathore W/o Amar Singh Rathore Aged About 23 Years At Present R/o Deepka Quarter No. M.Q. 68, Azad Chowk Gali No. 3, Deepka Police Station Deepka, District Korba C.G. ...Respondent(s)

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioners : Shri Gaurav Singhal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Nitansh Jaiswal, PL ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Order on Board

Per R amesh Sinha, Chief Justice

25.02.2026 Heard Shri Gaurav Singhal, learned counsel for the petitioners.

Also heard Shri Nitansh Jaiswal, PL appearing for the respondent/State. 1. Petitioners have filed the present petition with the following prayer:

“It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 528 of BNSS may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and quash the impugned FIR baring Crime No.33/2026 dated 09.01.2026 (Annexure P-1) registered for the offence under Section 04 of Dowry Prohibition Act and 85 Read with Section 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita by the Police of Police Station Janjgir, District-Janjgir-Champa (CG) registered against the petitioners, in the interest of justice accordingly.”

2. It transpires from the order-sheet dated 28.01.2026 that the matter being matrimonial in nature, it was sent for mediation. Pursuant to said order, the petitioner has also deposited Rs.1,00,000/- for the mediation purpose, and the said amount has been received by the respondent-2/wife.

3. After conducting mediation sessions, on 17.02.2026 Mediation centre has submitted its report stating therein that mediation between the parties failed/not settled.

4. By way of this petition, petitioners are seeking quashment of the FIR bearing Crime No.33 of 2026 dated 09.01.2026 registered for the offence under Sections 04 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short, ‘DP Act’) and Section 85 read with Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS, 2023’), by the Police of Police Station-

Janjgir, District-Janjgir-Champa, CG.

5. The facts of the case in brief are that, the marriage between petitioner-1 and respondent No.2/complainant was solemnized on 27.06.2025 according to Hindu rites and customs. It is alleged that the family members of the complainant gave dowry commensurate with their status. It is also alleged that father of the complainant also gave cash amont of Rs.7,00,000/- and a Car to the petitioner. Immediately after marriage, complainant was subjected to continuous physical and mental cruelty for demand of additional dowry, as well as land from her parents. She was restrained form visiting her parental home, however, for Navratri Festival, complainant had gone to her parental home, but she was not brought back to her matrimonial home. In this regard social meeting was held on 26.10.2025. On 20.11.2025, petitioner-1 left the complainant, who

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top