Vijay Singh Baudh v. State of Chhattisgarh
Case brief
What is this about?
Short single-judge order of the Chhattisgarh High Court dismissing WPS 3458 of 2021 (Vijay Singh Baudh v. State of Chhattisgarh & others, including Respondent No.5 James Lakra, Rural Agriculture Development Officer, Mahasamund) for want of prosecution due to petitioner's non-appearance despite two calls; decided 15/10/2025. Counsel: Shailja Shukla, Dy. G.A. for the State respondents; Yatika Verma for Respondent No.5 on behalf of Laxmi Tonde, Dy. G.A.; no counsel for petitioner. Marked NAFR (non-reportable); of value only on procedural point of dismissal for default, not on any substantive issue — no statute, precedent, issue or quantum appears in the text.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution, none having appeared for the petitioner despite two calls. ¶20