Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15316 (CHH)

PRADEEP MANDEY v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPCR/286/2025 · 2026-01-12

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:1916-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 286 of 2025 1 - Pradeep Mandey S/o Tiharu Ram Mandey Aged About 44 Years Resident Of Village Darchura, P.S. Simga, Tehsil Simga, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Capital Complex, Nawa Raipur (Atal Nagar), Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Commissioner Cum Detention Officer Narcotics Drugs And Psychotropic Substance Act 1988, Raipur Division, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Senior Superintendent Of Police Balodabazar-Bhatapara District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) 4 - Police Station Incharge Simga Police Station, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankur Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 13/01/2026 1. Heard Mr. Ankur Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned Govt. Advocate, appearing for the Respondent/State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer: ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2026.01.14 10:43:17 +0530 2 "10.1 A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of mandamus do issue calling the relevant records from the court below pertaining to the case of the petitioner for its kind perusal. 10.2 A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue direction to the respondent authorities to quash the order dated 16.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent no.2 in criminal case bearing no. 2025029701000054/09 B- 121 year 2025 against the petitioner. 10.3 Cost of the proceedings. 10.4 Any other writs and directions that may be facts & deemed fit and just in the circumstances of case." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the matter has become infructuous as the time period for externment has already been expired. Hence, this present petition has become infructuous. 4. In view of the above, this petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Alok