Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21198 (CHH)

PREETHY MARY v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/1430/2026 · 2026-06-14

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:23638-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1430 of 2026 1 - Preethy Mary D/o Shri M.O. Varkey Aged About 55 Years R/o A.N.M. Sadan, Duhaniya, District Dindori M.P. 2 - Vandana Francis D/o Shri K. Mathew Aged About 53 Years R/o Fatima Hospital, Civil Line, Agra, U.P. 3 - Sukhman Mandavi S/o Shri Mangta Ram Mandavi Aged About 19 Years R/o Markabeda, District Narayanpur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station G.R.P. Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B.Gopa Kumar and Mr. Mohit Kaushal, Advocates For Respondent(s) : Mr. Priyank Rathi, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 15.06.2026 1. Heard Mr. B.Gopa Kumar and Mr. Mohit Kaushal, learned counsel MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.06.15 17:17:42 +0530 2 for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Priyank Rathi, learned Government Advocate for respondent / State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for following relief:- “1. Quash the FIR dated 25.07.2025 registered at Police Station- GRP, Bhilai, bearing Crime No. 60/2025 along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. 2. That, this Hon'ble court may further be pleased to pass any other order in favor of petitioner as it may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case with cost.” 3. From perusal of the petition, it transpires that the petitioner has not impleaded the complainant as a party respondent. 4. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed, with liberty to file petition afresh with impleading the necessary parties. 5. Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for respondent No.1 / State is present. 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