Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2644 (CHH)

SUNIL KUMAR NISHAD v. SMT. RAJESHWARI NISHAD

CRR/1170/2023 · 2026-01-20

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:3686 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1170 of 2023 Sunil Kumar Nishad S/o Punit Kumar Nishad Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Singarpur, Post Faradfod, Police Station Devri Bangla, Tahsil Dondilohara, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1. Smt. Rajeshwari Nishad W/o Sunil Kumar Nishad Aged About 36 Years R/o Shiv Nagar, Ward No. 42, Basantpur, Tahsil and District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 2. Mayank Nishad S/o Sunil Kumar Nishad Aged About 12 Years Minor Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Rajeshwari Nishad, W/o Sunil Kumar Nishad, R/o Shiv Nagar, Ward No. 42, Basantpur, Tahsil and District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Applicants : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. Laxmeen Kashypa, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21.01 .202 6 . 1. Heard Mr. Rajendra Patel, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. By way of this revision, the applicant prayed for following relief:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this revision and further be pleased to set-aside the order dated 02.09.2023 PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.01.22 12:15:11 +0530 2 passed by the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.), in Misc. Cr. Case No. 97/2022, in the interest of justice.” 3. Mr. Rajendra Patel, learned counsel appeared and submits that since Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel has now been appointed as State Counsel, he prays for time to file his power on behalf of the applicant to argue the matter. 4. From perusal of the record, it is evident that no interim order has been passed in the present matter. Further, the case pertains to the year 2023 and has remained pending for a considerable period of time. In such circumstances, keeping the matter pending any further does not appear to be justified. Moreover, it appears that the applicant has lost interest in pursuing the present revision. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the revision is dismissed on this ground alone. 6. Let the certified of the this order as well as original record be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any.et the certified of the this order as well as original record be transmitted to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance and follow up action, if any. Sd/-/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti