CW-2001-0001Bilaspur, ChhattisgarhJudgment 12 March 2001

Bilaspur Man v. State of Chhattisgarh

The judgment of the Chhattisgarh High Court records the following account. Justice R.S. Garg quashed the prosecution of a Bilaspur man (Crime No. 12/2000, PS Torwa) launched on an anonymous inland letter alleging rickshaw-pullers possessed Rs 5 lakh of found money. Head Constable raided on 22 June 2000, seized Rs 8,000, extracted a custodial admission that it was bad money, locked up the accused and filed a challan under Section 41(1)(d) CrPC/379 IPC though no complaint of lost or stolen property existed. Holding the arrest false, mischievous and illegal and the challan cooked-up, the Court ordered the constable to personally pay Rs 10,000 compensation, return the seized money, and directed the CJM to lodge a criminal complaint against him. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

Externally reportedV2
What this record means

This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.

How verification works →

Report card

By judgment dated 12 March 2001 in Cri. M.P. under Section 482 CrPC (Criminal Case No. 3567/2000; Crime No. 12/2000, PS Torwa), the Chhattisgarh High Court (Coram: R. S. Garg, J.) returned findings adverse to the Head Constable (No. 861), Police Station Torwa, Bilaspur, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 10,000.

Register number
CG 10 CW 0001
Case reference
Cri. M.P. under Section 482 CrPC (Criminal Case No. 3567/2000; Crime No. 12/2000, PS Torwa) / 2001(3) MPHT 93 (CG)
Court and date
Chhattisgarh High Court (Coram: R. S. Garg, J.), 12 March 2001
Officer(s) at the material time
Head Constable (No. 861), Police Station Torwa, Bilaspur
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 41(1)(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Finding of the Court (extract)
“Mr. [name withheld], Head Constable, shall pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the present applicant as compensation for false/mischievous/illegal arrest and filing cooked-up and manufactured challan.” (at para 31)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: imprisonment and fine. Compensation: Rs 10,000.
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Chhattisgarh High Court judgment dated 12 March 2001 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported

Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.

Official finding: supports allegation.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“Mr. [name withheld], Head Constable, shall pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the present applicant as compensation for false/mischievous/illegal arrest and filing cooked-up and manufactured challan.” (para 31)

Institutional response

1
12 Mar 2001

Order issued

Concluded
Chhattisgarh High Court External · Binding

The Chhattisgarh High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 10,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: 2001(3) MPHT 93 (CG)
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.