Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18151 (CHH)

KHADIM KHAN v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCC/141/2026 · 2026-02-27

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:10448-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 141 of 2026 Khadim Khan S/o Salim Khan Aged About 57 Years R/o Village And Post Bhimda, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary of Home (Jail) Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. Director General Prisoners And Correctional Service Chhattisgarh Head Quarter Prisoners And Correctional Services Chhattisgarh Raipur Chhattisgarh 3. Jail Superintendents Central Jail Ambikapur Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Pritam Kumar Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 28.02.2026 1. Heard Mr. Pritam Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State/non-applicants. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.03.02 10:18:10 +0530 2 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant had earlier preferred WPCR No. 468 of 2025 before this Court, which was allowed vide order dated 22.08.2025. It is submitted that due to an inadvertent typographical error in paragraph 03 of the said order, the Court has mentioned “learned Upper Sessions Judge, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)”, whereas the correct description ought to be “learned Upper Sessions Judge, Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.)”. Therefore, correction of the aforesaid clerical error is prayed for. 3. Learned State counsel submits that he has no objection to the prayer made by the applicant. 4. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and as the error appears to be purely typographical in nature, the present MCC is allowed. It is directed that in the order dated 22.08.2025 passed in WPCR No. 468 of 2025, the words “learned Upper Sessions Judge, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)” occurring in paragraph 03 shall be read as “learned Upper Sessions Judge, Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.)”. 5. Let a copy of this order be placed along with the records of WPCR No. 468 of 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan