Radheshyam Chandrakar v. State
Chhattisgarh HCWPS/2490/2005
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
wk: m wMsm Wielm.i 200 %_W petitioner/s and…
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
¶1
ya:mma%§%mw@ $§$
¶2
wk: m wMsm Wielm.i
¶3
200
¶4
%_W
¶5
| anm’uFI W aggw |
mmmm | Wm < '&%QFTW v k? $a1f7<m anéfi! |
|---|---|---|
| Tumane | petitioner/s and the matter was pagsg appearc far t we peHtioner/Q. m Q“¢’~’=Y"L?—I93L w—-—~y gor‘ h Earkier SPC. was isgued to th Since no one for th ‘%&§ ’ Nan’bw h“ Mwmém Wmhaw ..Q.é .9‘..!§&5§ made on his!their behaif, the petition |
d over. Even in the secmd reund, none e State, e petitioner/s4 and no m 1s Mwagdw. J“ 3 dismls'sed far wam of pragecutmy'L/‘y '"’ / sai— Mamndra Mohan Shrivastava |
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Chhattisgarh HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- WPS/2490/2005
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court