2026:CGHC:19573-DB ALOK SHARMA NAFR Date: 2026.05.04 15:26:57 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 838 of 2026

1 - Naveen Pratap Singh S/o Shri Haresh Singh Aged About 32 Years R/o Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh

2 - Haresh Singh S/o Late Shri Bisahu Singh Aged About 70 Years R/o Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh

3 - Vindhyeshwari Singh W/o Shri Haresh Singh Aged About 66 Years R/o Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

2 - Manisha Singh W/o Naveen Pratap Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Seema Singh, Advocate.

For Respondent/State. : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Sourabh Sharma, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shr i Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shr i Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice .

28/04/2026 Heard Ms. Seema Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate, for the State and Mr.

Sourabh Sharma, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2.

2. The present Cr.M.P. is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by the petitioners, who are the husband and parents-in-law of respondent No. 2/complainant, for quashing of the charge-sheet filed in Challan No. 529/2025 arising out of FIR No. 554/2025 dated 28.10.2025 registered at Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh, for the offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and the criminal proceedings arising therefrom, which are under challenge in the present petition.

3. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner No. 1 is the husband of respondent No. 2, and petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are his aged parents, who have been arrayed as accused in the present case. The marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was solemnized on 15.12.2018, and out of the wedlock, a male child was born. Petitioner No. 1, being a member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), was posted at various places outside the State, and respondent No. 2 accompanied him during his postings, reflecting normal matrimonial cohabitation. Subsequently, disputes arose between the parties, and respondent No. 2 chose to reside at her parental home of her own accord. Prior to the registration of the FIR, the petitioners had also submitted a complaint apprehending false implication. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 lodged FIR No. 0554/2025 dated 28.10.2025 at Police Station Akaltara under Section 498-A IPC, pursuant to which a charge-sheet has been filed and criminal proceedings are pending before the competent Court. The petitioners contend that the allegations are false, vague, and do not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offence, and that the proceedings are an abuse of the process of law.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the entire allegations made against the petitioners are false and without any basis. The impugned FIR and charge-sheet are liable to be quashed as, even if the allegations are accepted in their entirety, they do not disclose the essential ingredients of cruelty under Section 498-A IPC, there being no specific allegation of unlawful dowry demand or harassment and only vague and omnibus allegations, particularly against the aged parents who were not residing with the couple, the admitted position that the jewellery remained in a bank locker in the name of respondent No. 2 further negates the allegation of dowry demand, while her conduct in accompanying petitioner No. 1 during his postings and thereafter voluntarily residing at her parental home is inconsistent with the allegations of sustained cruelty or abandonment, and the conduct of petitioner No. 1 in continuing normal family affairs demonstrates absence of any intention to