Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35150 (CHH)

DOJ KUMARI PATEL v. NANHI DAU @ NEELAMBER PATEL

ACQA/377/2018 · 2025-07-29

Shri Radhakishan Agrawal, Shri Sanjay Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 415 of 2018 XYZ --- Appellant Versus 1. Jai Mangal Patel S/o Neelamber Patel @Nanhi Dau Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Sahaspuri, Tahsil and District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kotara Road Raigarh , District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) ACQA No. 358 of 2018 XYZ --- Appellant Versus 1. Rupendra Patel S/o Jeevan Lal Patel Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Sahaspuri, Tahsil and District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 2. State of Chhattisgarh, through Police Station: Kotara Road, Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) SAURABH YADAV Digitally signed by SAURABH YADAV Date: 2025.07.30 15:54:47 +0530 ACQA No. 377 of 2018 XYZ --- Appellant Versus 1. Nanhi Dau @ Neelamber Patel S/o Sukrit Ram, aged about 72 years R/o Village Sahaspuri, Tahsil and District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 2. State of Chhattisgarh, through Police Station: Kotara Road, Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) __________________________________________________________________ For Appellant : None. For Respondent No. 1 in ACQA No. 415 & 377 of 2018 : Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 in ACQA No. 358 of 2018 : Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Senior Advocate with Mr. Suraj Jaiswal, Advocate For Respondent No. 2/State : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy. G.A. Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Order on Board 30.07.2025 1. Since these appeals have been preferred by the complainant/prosecutrix, therefore, her name is shown as ‘XYZ’ in the cause title in place of her original name, in order to protect her identity. 2. No one appears nor any representation is made on behalf of the appellant even when the case is called in the second round of hearing. 3. In the above circumstance, in absence of any representation, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss these appeals for non- prosecution. 4. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) (Radhakishan Agrawal) JUDGE JUDGE Saurabh