Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 22462 (CHH)

AJAY KAUSHIK v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

CRMP/283/2022 · 2026-06-18

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:25000 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 283 of 2022 1 - Ajay Kaushik S/o- Lalit Kumar Kaushik Aged About 35 Years R/o- 12/11, Priyadarshani Parisar (East), Supela, Bhilai, Tehsil, Civil Land Revenue District- Durg Chhattisgarh 2 - Damyanti Kaushik W/o- Lalit Kumar Kaushik Aged About 54 Years R/o- 12/11, Priyadarshani Parisar (East), Supela, Bhilai, Tehsil, Civil And Revenue District- Durg Chhattisgarh. 3 - Dr. Ritu Kaushik D/o Lalit Kumar Kaushik Aged About 35 Years R/o- 12/11, Priyadarshani Parisar (East), Supela, Bhilai, Tehsil, Civil And Revenue District- Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Supela, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chitrarekha Kaushik W/o Ajay Kaushik Aged About 23 Years R/o- Shri Santram Dharamgudi, Near Nagdev Mandir, Hatkeshwar Ward, Dhamtari, P.S.- Dhamtari, Tehsil, Civil And Revenue District- Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : None For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Amit Buxy, Dy. Govt. Advocate BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.06.20 17:20:03 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19 /06/2026 1. None appears nor is any representation made on behalf of the petitioners to press this petition. 2. Heard Mr. Amit Buxy, learned counsel for the State. 3. By filing the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for following relief(s):- “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and charge-sheet No.666/2021 filed by the police Supela, District Durg dated 08.10.2021 before the learned CJM, Durg against the present petitioners under Sections 498-A, 377, of IPC r/w Section 34 of IPC, 1860 and Sections 4, 5 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in pursuance of the FIR No.419/2020 dated 10.07.2020 be dismissed and quashed, in the interest of justice.” 4. As per the status report received, the trial has already been concluded and the case disposed on 13.08.2022. In view of the same, the relief sought in the present petition has become infructuous as nothing survives for consideration in this petition by this Court. 5. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed as having 3 become infructuous. No order as to costs. 6. Interim order, if any stands vacated. 7. Registry is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Khatai