Chhattisgarh High Court
CRMP/1700/2019 of MANIKLAL SAHU Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 25 September 2026
2026:CGHC:42040 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1700 of 2019 1 - Maniklal Sahu S/o Anjori Ram Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Tedesara, Police Station Somani, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh., District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 2 - Khemraj Sinha S/o Ishwar
CGHC010230692019
2026:CGHC:42040
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRMP No. 1700 of 2019
1 - Maniklal Sahu S/o Anjori Ram Sahu Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Tedesara, Police Station Somani, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh., District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 2 - Khemraj Sinha S/o Ishwar Lal Sinha Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Thanaud, Police Station Pulgaon, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Nohar Lal Sahu S/o Tiharu Lal Sahu Aged About 45 Years R/o Gujrati Colony, Police Station Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District :
Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh
4 - Keshav Chandrakar S/o Late Lakhan Lal Chandrakar Aged About 53
Years R/o Village Bhusrega, Police Station Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh
--- Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
--- Respondent
For Petitioner
:
None present
For Respondent/State
:
Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order On Board
26/09/2026
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. None appears, nor is any representation made on behalf of the petitioner even when this case is taken up for hearing in the second BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN
round. Hence, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution.
2. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed for want of prosecution Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge Balram