Allowed

State of Chhattisgarh v. Laxmi Sahu

Chhattisgarh HC14 Mar 2024CRMP/559/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the CrIMP to restore ACQA No. 318 of 2010 to its original number, recalling a prior order. The restoration was conditional upon depositing Rs. 2000 as costs by a set deadline and rectifying the appeal status by a subsequent date.

What did the court decide?

CRMP allowed; ACQA No. 318 of 2010 restored to original number upon payment of Rs. 2000/- cost deposit and rectification of defects by specified dates.

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Laxmi Sahu — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

CRMP No. 559 of 2024

¶4

State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Tarbahar, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Laxmi Sahu S/o Shivram Sahu Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Sirgitti Block, P.S. Tarbahar, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

Smt. Rukhmini, W/o Shivram Sahu, Aged About 50 Years R/o Block Sirgitti, P.S. Tarbahar, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶9

Smt. Sandhya Sahu, W/o Pradeep Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Ganganagar, Mangla, P.S. Civil Line, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

Ku. Asha Sahu, D/o Shivram Sahu, Aged About 18 Years R/o Bhatapara P.S. Bhatapara District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶11

Smt. Durga W/o Khemram Sahu, Aged About 23 Years R/o Near Hanuman Mandir, Sindhi School P.S. Mohdapara District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶12

Anita Sahu, W/o Suresh Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Pendari, P.S. Bhatapara, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶13

---- Respondents

¶14

For the Petitioner/State Shri Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Adv.

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal

¶16

ORDER ON BOARD (15/03/2024)

¶17

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

¶18

Heard.

¶19

By order dated 06/12/2023, the ACQA No. 318 of 2010 was restored to its original number subject to rectification of

¶20

defaults on or before 15/12/2023, which has not been done. In that view of the matter, Acquittal Appeal has not been restored.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of change of Law Officers in the office of the Advocate General, order could not be complied with.

¶22

We find that there is no reason for not complying the order dated 06/12/2023.

¶23

The reason assigned by the counsel in restoration application being satisfactory, is accepted. Accordingly, CRMP is allowed. The order dated 06/12/2023 is recalled. ACQA No. 318 of 2010 is restored to its original number, in the interest of justice subject to depositing Rs.2000/- to the C.G. High Court Legal Services Committee on or before 22^nd March, 2024, failing which this order shall stand dissolved without reference to the Bench. After the said cost is paid within the stipulated period, defect in the Acquittal Appeal be rectified on or before 01^st April, 2024.

¶24

Sd/Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Judge

¶25

Kamde

State of Chhattisgarh v. Laxmi Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Chhattisgarh v. Laxmi Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gayatri Devi Vs Chhattisgarh Rent Control Tribunal

Rajat Kumar Kesharwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Union of India Vs Rakesh

N. Prasanna Lakshmi Vs Union of India

Ashok Yadav Vs Smt. Mohani Sankhala

Suresh Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh