KHILAWAN PRASAD CHANDRAKAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
CRMP/1283/2025 · 2025-04-11
Shri Arvind Kumar Verma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17278 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 17278 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2025:CGHC:16838-DB
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1283 of 2025 Khilawan Prasad Chandrakar S/o Late Shri Ubhay Kumar Chandrakar Aged About 50 Years R/o Village - Mudkhusra, P.S. - Dondi Lohara, District - Balod (C.G.), And Presently Residing At Ward No.-2, Marapara, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner(s) versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House OfÏcer, P.S. - Mangchuwa, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. 2. Ghanshyam Sahu S/o Ramsingh Sahu R/o Village - Karutola, Mangchuwa, Balod, District - Balod, Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Love Kumar Ramteke, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri
Ramesh Sinha,
Chief Justice
Hon'ble
Shri Arvind Kumar Verma
, Judge
Order
on Board
Per
Ramesh Sinha
, Chief Justice
11.04.2025
1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.04.15 11:16:06 +0530
2
2. Heard Mr. Love Kumar Ramteke, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shailendra Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No. 1/State. 3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:
“It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the FIR dated 12.01.2024 in Crime No. 0002 of 2024 by Police Station Mangchuwa-Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh, against the petitioner, in the interest of justice.”
4. On perusal of the prayer in the present petition, it transpires that the present petition is drafted with the prayer which is defective one, therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the present petition with such a vague and sketchy prayer as there is no mention of the offences under/on which the FIR has been registered, to which learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present petition with a liberty to file afresh petition with proper prayer. 5. Learned State counsel has no objection. 6. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, as prayed for subject to depositing a sum of Rs.
2,000/- as cost by the petitioner in the Registry of this Court and submit a receipt of the same at the time of filing of the fresh petition, if any, and the amount so deposited, if any, shall be transmitted to the Government Special School for Visual & Hearing Impaired, Bilaspur. 3
7. Copy of the FIR and other documents may be returned back to the petitioner after retaining a photocopy of the same. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan