Chhattisgarh High Court
REVP/311/2026 of SMT PUNITA YADAV Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 12 October 2026
2026:CGHC:44168 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 311 of 2026 Smt Punita Yadav W/o Indrajeet Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village - Samundiri, Post - Kothali, Tahsil - Shankargarh, Distt. - Balrampur- Ramnujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh
CGHC010352232026
2026:CGHC:44168
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
REVP No. 311 of 2026
Smt Punita Yadav W/o Indrajeet Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village
- Samundiri, Post - Kothali, Tahsil - Shankargarh, Distt. - Balrampur- Ramnujganj (C.G.)
... Petitioner
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Development, Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atalnagar, Nava Raipur, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.)
2 - The Collector District - Balrampur-Ramnujganj (C.G.)
3 - The Project Officer Integrated Child Development - Project Shankargarh, Distt. - Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.)
4 - Janpad Panchayat - Shankargarh Through Its Chief Executive Officer - Shankargarh, Distt. - Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.)
5 - Smt. Mulari Yadav W/o Badri Prasad Yadav Aged About 56 Years R/o Ward No. 16 Village - Kothali, Tahsil-Shankargarh, Distt- Balrampur- Ramnujganj (C.G.)
... Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner
: Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate
For State
: Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 13.10.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present review petition with liberty to file a duly constituted fresh petition in accordance with law.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that he has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present review petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty, as prayed for, to file a duly constituted fresh petition in accordance with law. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge Yogesh