Dismissed¶5

Manoj Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Jan 2025CRMP/250/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Manoj Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh; CRMP No. 250 of 2025; High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; quashing of charge-sheet No. 494 of 2024 dated 02.11.2024; Police Station Masturi, District Bilaspur; Sections 420, 409, 34 Indian Penal Code; discharge of accused; dismissal as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh; Rs. 1,000/- cost; court fee not affixed in stay application; casual filing; Government Special School for Visual & Hearing Impaired, Bilaspur; Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice; Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge; order dated 22.01.2025.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition, subject to deposit of Rs. 1,000/- as cost in the Registry within one week, the amount to be transmitted to the Government Special School for Visual & Hearing Impaired, Bilaspur. ¶5

Manoj Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶5

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned charge-sheet No. 494 of 2024 dated 02.11.2024 should be quashed and the petitioner discharged from the offence under Sections 420, 409, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (raised by prayer; not adjudicated as the petition was withdrawn).

¶2

Ratio / Principle

The present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh, subject to the petitioner depositing Rs. 1,000/- as cost in the Registry of the Court within one week, the said amount to be transmitted to the Government Special School for Visual & Hearing Impaired, Bilaspur.

¶5

Key takeaways

The Court observed, on perusal of the office note dated 20.01.2025, that court fee had not been affixed in the stay application and that the petitioner had filed the present petition in a very casual manner, forming the basis for permitting withdrawal with cost.ratio¶3

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRMP No. 250 of 2025, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (order dated 22.01.2025, per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice; bench also comprising Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge): Manoj Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh (SHO, Police Station Masturi, Bilaspur). The petition sought quashing of charge-sheet No. 494 of 2024 dated 02.11.2024 and discharge of the petitioner from the offence under Sections 420, 409, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. On an office note dated 20.01.2025 showing that court fee had not been affixed in the stay application and that the petition had been filed casually, counsel sought permission to withdraw with liberty to file afresh; the State counsel raised no objection. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn with that liberty, subject to deposit of Rs. 1,000/- as cost in the Registry within one week, to be transmitted to the Government Special School for Visual & Hearing Impaired, Bilaspur. The substantive quashing question was not adjudicated.

2025:CGHC:3816-DB

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRMP No. 250 of 2025

¶6

Manoj Kumar Sahu S/o Govind Ram Sahu Aged About 29 Years R/o Village- Birra, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House OfÏcer, Police StationMasturi, District- Bilaspur(C.G.)

¶10

...Respondent(s)

¶11

For Petitioner	: Mr. Abhishek Banjare, Advocate on behalf
	of Mr. Veer Verma, Advocate.
For Respondent/State	: Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶16

22. 01.2025

¶17

Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN BRIJMOHAN MORLE MORLE Date: 2025.01.23 10:56:19 +0530

¶18

1. Heard Mr. Abhishek Banjare, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. Veer Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent/State.

¶19

¶20

2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:

¶21

“ It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this application and quash the impugned charge-sheet No. 494 of 2024 dated 02.11.2024 (in respect for the applicant only) and the applicant may kindly be discharged from the offence under Section 420, 409, 34 of Indian Penal Code by this Hon’ble Court, in the interest of justice. ”

¶22

3. From perusal of the ofÏce note dated 20.01.2025, it transpires that Court fee has not been afÏxed in the stay application and the petitioner has filed the present petition in a very casual manner, to which learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present petition with a liberty to file afresh petition.

¶23

4. Learned State counsel has no objection.

¶24

5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, as prayed for subject to depositing a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as cost by the petitioner in the Registry of this Court within a period of one week from today and the said amount shall be transmitted to the Government Special School for Visual & Hearing Impaired, Bilaspur.

¶25

Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶26

Brijmohan

Manoj Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivshankar Prasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Matiyas @ Matiya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs Sanjeev Kiran

Sunil Kumar Lunawat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raju Kurre Vs State of Chhattisgarh