Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10374 (CHH)

SHATRANJAN SINGH HARMUKH v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/786/2026 · 2026-04-28

Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:19751 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 786 of 2026 1 - Shatranjan Singh Harmukh S/o Ramadhaar Singh Harmukh, Aged About 70 Years, R/o House No. 160, Ward No. 05, Tedesara Tehsil, District Rajnandgaon(CG). 2 - Dagam Singh Harmukh S/o Ramadhaar Singh Harmukh, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Anjora, Tehsil And District Durg (CG). 3 - Prem Singh Harmukh S/o Ramadhaar Singh Harmukh, Aged About 69 Years, R/o Bazar Chowk Thanaud Village-Anjora, Tehsil And District- Durg (CG). 4 - Tarun Kumar Deshmukh S/o Nepal Singh Deshmukh, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Ward No. 05, Gandhi Chowk Village- Anjora, Tehsil And District Durg (CG). 5 - Kaushal Deshmukh S/o Nepal Singh Deshmukh, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Ward No. 05, Gandhi Chowk, Village-Anjora, Tehsil And District- Durg (CG). ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG). 2 - Superintendent Of Police Durg, District- Durg (CG). 3 - Station House Officer Police Station Pulgaon, District Durg (CG). 4 - Mukesh Kumar Chakradhari S/o Somnath Chakradhari Aged About 55 Years R/o Ward No. 02, Pishegaon, Tehsil And District Durg (CG). 5 - Prerit Chandrakar S/o Somnath Pawan Chandrakar, Aged About SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2026.04.29 15:03:41 +0530 2 62 Years, R/o Kasaridih Kanhiyapuri Padamnabhapur, Near Hanuman Temple, Tehsil And District Durg (CG). ... Respondents For Petitioners : None. Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Mr. Suresh Tandon, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 29/04/2026 1. On 16.04.2026, no one appeared and today also, when the case is listed for orders on default, no one is appearing on behalf of the petitioners, it appears that the petitioners is not interested in this case. 2. In the absence of any representation on behalf of the petitioners, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution. 3. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.