(C.G.) APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF, CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973. I ii/ _ M V 7il APPLICANTS 1. indira 2. Vinod Gupta S/o— late Manharan /j5\’\f4( w 3. Smt. Saras Gupta 56 w/o— Sg)?’% Gupta, aged in Iaw) about years, :gggw ”w/Lryyw’xm 6w (mother y , & both W v “17/9 Applicants no.» 1r g permanent R/o— Bhathagaon Chowk, Radha Swami Cotony, near Siddheshawari Mavndir, Raipur, x District- Raipur (C.G.) at present Block- R/o- Village- Amsena, ‘Aarang, District— Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS % NON—APPLICANTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station— Mahiia Thana Raipur I. District— Raipur (C.G.) 2. Smt. Sunita Gupta w/o- Rite§h Gupta, aged about 30 years, .R/o-_ Bhathagaon Chowk, Radha Swami Colony, near Siddheshawari Mandir, Raipur, District- Raipur HIGH OOURT OF CHllATTISGARI-I AT BIWUR; SB : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITINKER‘DIWAKER cmmrxo. zog'lzom APPLICANTS Ritesh Gupta 85 Others vexsus NON-APPLICANTS State af Chhattisgarh 85 Another Shri F.S.Kha1e, counsel for the applicanis. Shri Vaibhav Govcrdhan, P.L. for the State. \ ¢ PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF’THE ¢R.F;c. ' ORDER (25.03.2010) Heani on admission. The present petiu'on med ‘under Section 482 Cr.P.C.. is for quashing the charge sheet (challan) md by. MahiJa Thana, Raipur against the peiitionem on the comylaint of non-applicant No.2 for the oh‘ences under Section 498-A/ 34 of the IPC. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis'of mitten compiaint dated 19.6.09 lodged by the non—@plicant No.2, , the investigation was done by the police and after thorough \h investigation the challan was med against the petitioners on 27.11.2009 for the ofences under Section 498-A] 34 of the IPC. 3. Contention of the counsel for the applicants is that, even if the entire prosecuh'on case is taken as it is, no{ oEence whatsoever is made out against the applicants. He i submits that the piesent is a case Where the abuse of process is writ large and therefore the challan hled against} the applicants deserves to be quashed. 4. On the other hand counsel for the State points out 3 that in the written complaint itself the allegations have been made against all the applicants and on which basis the ?