Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37429 (CHH)

RAMESH KEDIA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1392/2021 · 2025-03-19

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:12989-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1392 of 2021 Ramesh Kedia S/o Amirchand Kedia Aged About 62 Years (Wrongly Mentioned As Kediya In Order Sheet) R/o Lawan Road Kediy Arice Mill Baloda Bazar, Taluka Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Officer Incharge Police Station City Kotwali, District Baloda Bazar District Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 19 .0 3 .2025 1 Heard Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondent. 2 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following relief:- ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.03.19 17:42:41 +0530 2 “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and in exercise thereof call for the records if necessary, and further be pleased to quash the FIR No. 442/2015 and the consequent charge sheet No. 390/2015, against the petitioner u/s U/s. 406, 409, 420 of IPC & U/s 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 by PS: City Kotwali, Distt. Baloda Bazar (C.G.), Baloda Bazar (C.G). And/or pass orders quashing the criminal case No. 1492/2015, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baloda Bazar (CG) since the same is an outcome of the aforesaid FIR and charge sheet, which is nothing but an abuse of the process of law.” 3 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that instant petition has become infructuous as the trial has already been concluded and the petitioner has been acquitted. 4 Learned State counsel endorses the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5 In view of the above, instant petition is dismissed as having rendered infructuous. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu