Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43468 (CHH)

KHUSHI RAM KUNDNANI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER

CRMP/2629/2018 · 2025-01-10

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:1887 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2629 of 2018 Khushi Ram Kundnani S/o Shri R.M. Kundnani, Aged About 45 Years R/o Shop No. E-2, Maruti Business Park, G.E. Road, Raipur Chhattisgarh R/o New Rajendra Nagar, Bajaj Colony, P.S. New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1- State Of Chhattisgarh And Another Through Police Station Telibandha, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Vijay Nihichlani S/o Indan Das Nihichlani, Aged About 35 Years R/o Flat No. 103, Block A Impressia New Rajendra Nagar Thana New Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No.2 : None. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/01/2025 1. None appears nor is any representation made on behalf of the petitioner as well as respondent No.2 to press this petition on repeated calls when the case is called out. 2. Mr. Amit Verma, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 respondent No. 1/State, is present. 3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the instant petition and the quash the order dated 27.11.2018 (Annexure P/1) passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur and the order dated 04.05.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class Raipur (Annexure P/2) in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 4. Under such circumstance, it appears that the petitioner has lost interest in pursuing the matter any further. Hence, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution. 5. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. 6. Interim order, if any, granted earlier stands vacated. 7. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal