Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 56704 (CHH)

SMT. SHYAMADEVI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1171/2023 · 2025-11-09

Shri Sanjay Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1171 of 2023 Smt. Shyamadevi W/o Late Deepchand Pasi Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Aheri, Police Station Nandni, District- Durg (CG) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Bhilai Bhatthi, District- Durg (CG) 2 - Amirchand Pasi S/o Agnu Ram Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Aheri Khar, Police Station Nandni, District- Durg (CG) Permanent Address- Village Akbarpur, Police Station Kerakat, District- Jonpur, Uttar Pradesh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Divya Sahu, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Advocate. For State/ Respondent No.1 Shri Ruhul Ameen, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 Shri Shyam Kumar, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Achyut Tiwari, Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Justic e Sanjay S. Agrawal Order on Board 10/11/2025 1. By virtue of this petition, the petitioner is questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 13/09/2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg (C.G.) in R.C.C. No.16716 of SUNITA GOSWAMI Digitally signed by SUNITA GOSWAMI Date: 2025.11.10 17:21:58 +0530 2 2006 and, during the pendency of this petition, counsel appearing for the petitioner has prayed for withdrawal of this petition with liberty to avail the alternative remedy in the light of principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., reported in 2025 INSC 804. 2. Having considered the aforesaid submissions of the counsel appearing for the petitioner in the light of the aforesaid principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the above referred matter, the instant petition stands disposed of with a direction that, if the petitioner questions the impugned judgment of acquittal in appeal within a period of 60 days from today, the concerned Sessions Judge would not insist upon the limitation while deciding the same and will proceed to decide the appeal, in accordance with law. 3. Registry shall return the certified copy of the impugned judgment (Annexure-A/1) and relevant documents to counsel for the petitioner after obtaining the photocopy of the same and, shall remit the record to the concerned Court forthwith. 4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) JUDGE sunita