Singls Bench BEFORE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION N0. U^ OF 2011 APPLICANTS h^dfeyShriil'^S.^ '^^....^.^^l...—- 1.- Nitin Sinha, age 33 years, S/o K.P. Sinha, R/o.- Chhote Atarmuda Raigarh, Teh 8s Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) P.S. Chakradhar Nagar Raigarh 2. Makar S/o Sunder Sai, age 37 years, R/o. - Pandripani, Teh. 8s Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through: P.S. Chakradhar Nagar, Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 2. Rajkumar Tejwani S/o Bhanwar Lal Tejwani, aged about 37 years, R/o. Chakradhar Nagar, Raigarh, Teh. & Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF Cr.P.C. RESPONDENTS VERSUS 1. •BR^ Tf 1'e,:iT^ 'ssn ant?! a?cnq>' 3 3^f •*ii<4ici4, yTil<-iii<o, [sttfiyy ..^..m:.f.:....i.i?.i/..u.. sii^r -VR; (-y^^) TOnw^iftgsn^r SB: Hon'bie iVIr. Justice ^rs(fc't41^ '^lTR^ff ^ fe ;. '?t^<^ •^ aiRpT 311^" Mr. Ashutosh Shrivastava, Counse! for the petitioners. Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent ! No.1 on advancecopy. | Heard. This petition has j?een filed by the petitioners for quashment of F.1.R No.47p/2010 dated 13.12.2010 registered at Police Station Chakraphar Nagar as aiso order dated 08.06.2011 ofthedty Sup^rintendent of Police, Raigarh. Learned counsel foi1 respondent No.2 had iodg| various offences and a su| passed by the trial Court parties and the decree pa the petitioners srgues that earlier ed a report alleging commission of t was also filed by him against the petstioners, in which, a corfipromise was entered into betw'een the parties and a compi|omise judgment and decree vfas on 24.11.: in CMI Suit No.23- A/2010. In iight of the c{)mpromise arrived at betoeen ihe .sed, the investigating officer of the concerned Poiice Stati^n filed a report before the Superintendent of Police pjroposing to submit a closure report, ! but the same has not beeiji accepted by the Superintendent of •C^^i^r;i~-~jJ^.''^;.f>—2/20;i —1,50,000. *ll*l<rll (h*iieh 'S^T '<inM^, 'aT^vw, \~^v\wi< ^......<lB..f..:........i.i.l/.RWI. 200 sn^r 'v^f; (ijcifgsi^i) an^( ^a R-fi* ^WT 3H^r 3Rfl TOIIW^IWI •SI^B l^ Police and a direction has charge sheet in the concernedi -sw&G---The"inattercffa^'been iwsy inb'w ?e nc^ ..,,»PoliceOffigerjs^gyj^to M- itK&'nBat6Fiafc&olteet©Ei^yfingir to ble subm1tftS-befi5r^A& HQUs&.,Q,ffic$r,. therefpre, sha!| concerned Magistrate in t-h^material collected by him. In case, the petitionei| passed by the Magistrate takir( would be at iiberty to take avai!able to them'und'er the la^ 4esn issued by him to submit a ICourt. |investigated by the Poiice. The SL|bmit appropriate report based on ir|vestigation and the same is liable Masistrate. The Station submit proper report before the with !aw on the basis of ccticerned accelrdance ..,.~'.i.?-i. <»i<ilci«i1ttfMvS'? 1yzt <("t<ii< ^TsifOTsn^r |s are aggrieved by any order ig cognizance of the offence, they of such remedy as may be reaourse V, Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge vmflvMolii"ii<'wi, (id-ii<i'ii4— I''S/140—2/2011—1,50,000.