Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11763 (CHH)

SHANTAMA JOSEPH v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPCR/628/2025 · 2026-02-02

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:5930-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 628 of 2025 Shantama Joseph D/o Joseph Ventadatil Jon Aged About 56 Years R/o House No. 88, Holycross Women College Parisar, Patpariya, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Kailash Mishra S/o Late Chandrashekhar Mishra Aged About 60 Years R/o Godhanpur, Tahsil Ambikapur, Distt. Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Anurag Singh, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Add. A.G. and Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 03.02.2026 1. Heard Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, learned Senior Advocate along with Mr. Anurag Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.02.03 17:30:05 +0530 2 Shashank Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General for respondents / State as well as Mr. Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for respective respondent. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for following relief:- “1] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions quashing the impugned F.I.R bearing no. 0541/2025 dated 18.09.2025 registered at Police station Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), District Surguja (C.G) against petitioners for the offences under section 505(1)(b) of Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2] That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, which it deems fit and proper.” 3. Leaned State counsel as well as learned counsel for respondents submits that closure report has already been filed in the matter and further, the same has not been challenged. 4. In view of the same, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file afresh challenging the closure report filed during the pendency of the present petition. 5. In view of the same, as prayed by learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of, with liberty to take recourse to law. 6. Certified copy of the documents annexed in the petition, if any, may be returned back to the counsel for the petitioner after obtaining the photocopy of the same. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet