1 2025:CGHC:1344-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 62 of 2025 1 - Firdos Ahmad S/o Late Abdul Talicb Aged About 42 Years R/o Nehru Nagar, Chandani Chowk Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Nushrat Parveen W/o Jamlee Muhammad Qureshi Aged About 44 Years R/o Bhilai 32 Acres, Housing Board, District Durg Chhattisgarh 3 - Ishrat Patveen W/o Mohd. Shakeel Aged About 39 Years R/o Chaurasia Colony, Santoshi Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Smt. Kafiya Begum W/o Abdul Talib Aged About 70 Years R/o Nehru Nagar, Chandni Chowk Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 5 - Mohd. Afjal S/o Late Abdul Talib Aged About 51 Years R/o Gokul Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (Cg) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mahila Thana, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Nahid Parveen W/o Firdos Ahmed Aged About 33 Years R/o Shafi Villa, Imli Khadan, Chaurasia Colony, Raipur District Raipur (Cg) Crime No. 145/2022 Ps Mahila Thana Raipur, District Raipur (C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Dy. G.A. MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.01.10 14:47:05 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 09.01.2025 1. Heard Mr. Priyank Rathi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Shailendra Sharma, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the respondent No.1 / State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for following relief:- “It is, therefore, humbly prayed that, the Hon’ble Court may kindly allow the petition and, the FIR (Annexure A1) and Chargesheet (Annexure A2) and Cognizance order and subsequent proceeding / order sheets (Annexure A3) in connection with Crime No. 145/2022, PS Mahila Thana, Raipur, District Raipur be quashed.” 3. From perusal of the present petition, it transpires that earlier, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to file afresh on the ground that the relief prayed for in the petition was a defective one. But, so far as present petition is concerned, the relief prayed for in the present petition is also a defective one as the counsel for the petitioners has not mentioned the particulars of the order taking cognizance with respect to date of passing of the order and the offences under which the charges have been framed and has only drafted a vague and sketchy prayer. 4. In view of the same, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to withdraw the present petition as well, with liberty to file afresh with 3 appropriate prayer and pleadings. 5. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to file petition afresh with appropriate prayer and pleadings. 6. Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for respondent No.1 / State is present. 7. Certified copy of the documents annexed in the petition, if any, may be returned back to the counsel for the petitioner after obtaining the photocopy of the same. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet