Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35645 (CHH)

RISHIKESH MISHRA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1269/2021 · 2025-03-07

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:11364-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1269 of 2021 Rishikesh Mishra S/o Shri Kamlakant Mishra Aged About 35 Years Caste Bramhin, Village Rajpur, Police Station Lailunga, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Duldula, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Anjali Mishra W/o Rishikesh Mishra Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Noniyatala, Police Station Duldula, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Sunil Verma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Malay Kumar Jain, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate Hon'ble S hri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 07/03/2025 1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN 2 the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR in Crime No. 0006 of 2021, registered at Police Station House Duldula, District Jashpur and its further consequences against the petitioner. 2. The petitioners have filed the present CRMP with the following reliefs: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the F.I.R. and in Crime no. 0006/2021 of Police Station House, Duldula District Jashpur and its further consequences against the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition enabling him to file a petition along with the parents of the petitioner, who are the in-laws of the private respondent No.2, so that further efforts for mediation can be made between the petitioner and his wife, who are having a child. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondent No.2 would submits that he has no objection. 5. On the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the present CRMP is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to file a duly constituted petition. Interim order granted earlier, if any, is also vacated. 6. Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the annexures to the learned counsel for the petitioner after retaining the attested true copy of the same. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved