Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 22115 (CHH)

RAJESH RAI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1674/2025 · 2025-06-19

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:26019-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1674 of 2025 Rajesh Rai S/o Lt. Ramanand Rai Aged About 52 Years R/o D - 19/2020, Akanksha Kunj, Risali, Bhilai Nagar, District Durg Chhattisgarh, (Accused) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Chauki Smriti Nagar, Supela, Bhilai Nagar, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 2 - Superintendent Of Police District Durg Chhattisgarh. 3 - Prabhat Narayan Shukla S/o Lt. Kripa Narayan Shukla Aged About 78 Years R/o House No. 12/273, Mohalla Katra, Near Dr. Bhargav Nursing Home, Behind Shiv Mandir, Thana Sadar Kotwali, District Banda (U.P.), (Complainant) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Satish Kumar Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 20.06.2025 MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.06.20 17:27:56 +0530 2 1. Heard Mr. Satish Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents No.1 & 2 / State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for following relief:- “It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be allow this petition and set aside/quashed the FIR/Crime no. 0049/2025, registered at Smriti nagar Police chouki, thana Supela, District Durg, against the petitioner/accused under section 420, 406 and 34 of I.P.C. and quashing the criminal proceeding, which is going on before the Lower Court, in the interest of justice.” 3. From perusal of the relief prayed for in the present petition, it transpires that the same is a defective one as the counsel for the petitioner has not mentioned the particulars with respect to the charge-sheet as well as the order taking cognizance and he 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, with liberty to file afresh with appropriate prayer and pleadings. 5. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to file petition afresh with appropriate prayer and pleadings, subject to depositing a sum of Rs.2,000/- as cost by the petitioners in the Registry of this Court and the same shall be transmitted to the Government Children’s Home for Orthopedically Handicapped, Mana Camp Raipur (C.G.). 3 6. Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for respondent No.1 & 2 / 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, subject to deposit of the fine amount. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet