Dismissed¶31

Vidhi Gandhi and Others v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC20 Aug 2025WPC/1627/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WPC No. 1627 of 2010, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; decided 21.08.2025; neutral citation 2025:CGHC:42572; marked NAFR. Keywords: release of security document; infructuous writ petition; Additional Registrar (Judicial); security deposit Rs.87,500/-; sale-deed dated 07.01.2000; dismissal as infructuous. Coram: Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J. Counsel: Awadh Tripathi for petitioners; Shailja Shukla, Dy.G.A., for Respondents/State; Malay Shrivastava shown for 'Respondent No.4'. No statutory provision or judicial precedent is discussed in the order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Additional Registrar (Judicial) to release the document (copy of sale-deed dated 07.01.2000) furnished as security by the petitioners. ¶31

Vidhi Gandhi and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

NIRMALA RAO

2025:CGHC:42572

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 1627 of 2010

¶7

Vidhi Gandhi, D/O Shri Vijay Gandhi, aged about 22 years, R/O Baihar Road, Balaghat, District Balaghat (M.P.).

¶8

2 Danish V. Abraham S/O Shri Dr. V. Abraham, aged about 24 years, R/O M.I.G.-4, Vaishali Nagar, Bhilai, District- Durg, (C.G.).

¶9

Rajshri Singour D/O Shri Ajay Kumar Singaur, aged about 24 years, R/O B.T. Road, Awasthi Complex, Garha, Jabalpur, (Μ.Ρ.).

¶10

Richa Verma D/O Shri Satyanarayan Verma, aged about 25 years, R/O 1917, Awasthi Complex, B.T. Road, Garha, Jabalpur, (M.P.).

¶11

Vinay Agrawal, S/O Shri Premchand Agrawal, aged about 25 years, R/O Bhagwati Rice Mill, Shankar Nagar, Kurud, District- Dhamtari, (C.G.).

¶12

Devesh Kumar Rathore S/O Sunil Kumar Rathore, aged about 26 years, R/O Quarter No. 1-B/32, Kunda, Post-Bishrampur, District- Sarguja, (C.G.).

¶13

Neha Lal D/O Shri J.P. Lal, aged about 24 years, R/O Agya Nagar, Bilaspur, Distt.-Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶14

8.Venus Abel S/O Jasbir Singh, aged about 25 years, R/O Sukhdeo Colony, Delhi.

¶15

Vishal Kumar Jivnani, S/O Shri Sushil Kumar Jivnani, aged about 25 years, R/O Hira General Stores, Sanjay Chowk, Baikunthpur, District- Koriya, (C.G.).

¶16

Priyanka Chauksey D/O Shri P.C. Chauksey, aged about 25 years, R/O Prabhat agency Main Rood, Kareli, District Narsinghpur (М. Р.).

¶17

Ritesh Jaiswal S/O Pradeep Jaiswal, aged about 24 years, R/O H. No. 205, Gayatri Plaza, Kila Road Mahal, Nagpur (M.H.)

¶18

Ku. Sneha Puri D/O Sanjay Puri, aged about 23 years, R/O Plot No. 224, Ramnagar, Nagpur, District-Nagpur (Maharasthra).

¶19

... Petitioner(s)

¶20

versus

¶21

¶22

State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, Mantralay, Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.).

¶23

Dental Council of India. New Delhi, through Secretary, A.Ι.Ε. Galib Marg, Kolta Road. Temple lane. New Delhi.

¶24

Chhattisgarh Dental College and Research Institute, Run by Youth Foundation of India, a Society, through its Secretary, Sundra, Rajnandgaon, District-Rajnandgaon, (C.G.)

¶25

	... Respondent(s)
For Petitioners	: Shri Awadh Tripathi, Advocate.
For Respondents/State	: Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy.G.A.
For Respondent No.4	: Shri Malay Shrivastava, Advocate.

¶26

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶27

Order on Board

¶28

21.08.2025

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that vide order dated 08.09.2010, the petitioners were directed to furnish a security deposit of Rs.87,500/- to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar (Judicial), High court of Chhattisgarh. Accordingly, the petitioners had furnished a copy of the original sale-deed dated 07.01.2000 as security. He would contend that the authority concerned may be directed to release the said document, as the petition has become infructuous.

¶30

Accordingly, the Additional Registrar (Judicial) is hereby directed to release the document furnished as security by the petitioners.

¶31

Taking into consideration the statement made by counsel for the petitioners, this petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶34

Nimmi

Vidhi Gandhi and Others v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vidhi Gandhi and Others v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nazarius Ekka Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ajay Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ram Kishan Bhatia (Dead) through Lrs. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nurul Islam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Prasanjit Mandal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gayatri Women Self Help Group Vs State of Chhattisgarh