Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32947 (CHH)

MANOJ MANDLESHWAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1999/2023 · 2025-07-28

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:36780-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1999 of 2023 Manoj Mandleshwar S/o Vishe Ram Mandleshwar Aged About 34 Years Presently Posted As Labour Inspector, District Bemetara R/o Shyam Colony, Chhuiha, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C..G) ... Petitioner versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Baloda, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Vedant Shadangi, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 29.07.2025 1. Heard on I. A. No. 02/2025, this is an application for withdrawal of the present petition. SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2025.07.30 10:56:58 +0530 2 2. The instant CRMP has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer :- “3.1 It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this petition and set-aside/ quash the impugned First Information Report registered against the petitioner in Crime No.0617/2023 Dated 17.08.2023 at police station Baloda, District: Balodabazar-Bhatapara against the petitioner under Section 34, 409, 420 of the IPC in the interest of justice. 3.2 Any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be made.” 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge sheet has been filed before the learned trial Court, therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the present petition to which learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition and the abovementioned I.A. No.2 has also been moved by the petitioner for withdrawal of the petition with liberty to take appropriate recourse to law as after due investigation, the charge sheet has been filed before the learned trial Court. 4. Learned State counsel has no objection. 5. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, on due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. 6. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, as prayed for. 3 7. Certified copy of the documents annexed in the petition, if any, may be returned back to the counsel for the petitioner/ State after obtaining the photocopy of the same. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice S. Bhilwar/ Jyoti