SMT. SADHBANI MAHARANA v. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
WPCR/205/2026 · 2026-04-15
Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6945 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6945 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2026:CGHC:17331-DB
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 205 of 2026 Smt. Sadhbani Maharana W/o Shri Rajendra Maharana Aged About 54 Years R/o Block-14b, Street No. 29 Sector-05 Bhilai, District-Durg (C.G.)
... Petitioner versus 1 - The Superintendent of Police District-Durg Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Station House Officer, Police Station Sector-06 Kotwali, Bhilai Nagar, District-Durg Chhattisgarh 3 - Smt. Radha Singh W/o Shri Pradeep Singh Aged About 49 Years R/o Block-08a, Street No. 79, Sector-06 Bhilai District- Durg Chhattisgarh
... Respondents For Petitioner : None appears For Respondent/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri
Ramesh Sinha,
Chief Justice
Hon'ble
Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
, Judge
Order
on Board
Per
Ramesh Sinha
, Chief Justice
16 . 04 .202
6
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:
“a) A writ and/or an ordered in the nature of appropriate writ do issue Calling for the relevant records from the concerned court below relating to the petitioner's case for its kind perusal. ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA
2 b) A writ and/or an ordered in the nature of appropriate writ do issue quashing the order dated 18/11/2024(Annuxure P-1) passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg (Chhattisgarh), and impugned ordered dated 02/01/2026(Annexure P- 2) passed by 8th district and session judge, Durg Chhattisgarh. c) A writ and/or an ordered in the nature of appropriate writ do issue Direct Respondent No.02 (SHO) to register FIR under Section 318(4) BNS/420. d) Pass such other orders as deemed fit in the interest of justice. e) Cost of the petition may also be awarded.”
2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner on repeated calls to press this petition. Further, it transpires that the instant petition is defective one as the Registry has pointed out as many as 11 defects in filing the instant petition.
3. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed on this ground alone. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra