Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32271 (CHH)

Mukesh Dagar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

CRR/627/2015 · 2025-08-24

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:43112 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 627 of 2015 Mukesh Dagar Wd/o Late Rajesh Dagar Aged About 36 Years R/o Maruti Enclave, Tatibandh Raipur Chhattisgarh, At Present R/o House No. - 72, C/o - Jaisingh Yadav, Ground Floor, Naharpur, Section - 7, Rohini, New Delhi - 110085. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Amanaka, Civil And Rev. Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Preetam S/o Shriram Kumar Aged About 36 Years R/o Flat No. 52, Sector 23 Pocket -1, D.D.A. Flat, Dwarika, New Delhi. 3 - Tinu @ Satendar Singh S/o Balbir Singh Aged About 33 Years R/o Flat No. 66 Suruchi Apartment Sector - 10, Dwarika, New Delhi. ---- Respondent For Applicant : None. For Respondent No.1/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. For Respondents No.2 & 3 : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25.08.2025 1. None appears for the applicant. Also heard Ms. Monika Thakur, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondent No.1/State, and Mr. Maneesh Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3. 2. The present Criminal Revision has been filed by the applicant with following prayer: “ It is therefore, prayed, that the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this revision and may RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 direct to the trial Court to frame the charge for the offence punishable under Section 302 along with Section 120(B) of I.P.C. against the respondent No.2 and 3, in the interest of justice. ” 3. Learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3 submitted that the trial Court has acquitted the respondents No.2 and 3 against which an acquittal appeal bearing ACQA No. 92/2017 was filed before this Court, and the said matter has become infructuous. 4. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3, the present criminal revision is dismissed as infructuous. 5. Let a certified copy of this order be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar