Allowed¶28

Geeta Ram Netam v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC18 Feb 2026MCC/178/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court (Bilaspur) order dated 19/02/2026 by Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J., allowing MCC No. 178 of 2026 and restoring WPS No.8542/2023 (Geeta Ram Netam Versus State of Chhattisgarh) to its original number after dismissal for want of prosecution on 13.11.2025; bonafide oversight by counsel who missed the cause list; no objection from State counsel; restoration of writ petition dismissed in default.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of WPS No.8542/2023 to its original number. ¶28

Geeta Ram Netam Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

2026:CGHC:8909

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCC No. 178 of 2026

¶6

Geeta Ram Netam S/o Shri Tiju Ram Netam Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Rubad, Police Station Piparchhedi, District Gariyaband (C.G.)

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home (Police), Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶10

2. Inspector General Of Police Police Range, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶11

3. Superintendent Of Police (Sp) Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.)

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

¶14

For Applicant	: Mr. Kunal Das, Advocate.
For State/respondents	: Mr. Arpit Agrawal, P.L.

¶15

Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶16

Order on Board

¶17

19/02/2026

¶18

1. Today, the case is listed for order(s) on default(s).

¶19

2. The default(s), as pointed out by the Registry is overruled.

¶20

3. Heard on M.C.C.

¶21

4. This M.C.C. application has been filed for restoration of WPS No.8542/2023, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2025 for want of prosecution.

¶22

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 13.11.2025, the applicant’s counsel overlooked the cause list and missed the case, therefore, he could

¶23

Digitally signed DEEPTI by JHA DEEPTI JHA

¶24

¶25

not appear, when the case is called out for hearing, the said mistake was bonafide, therefore, he prayed that instant M.C.C. may be allowed and WPS No.8542/2023 may be restored to its original number.

¶26

6. Learned State counsel has no objection to allow the prayer made by the counsel for the applicant.

¶27

7. On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, which is well supported by an affidavit, instant M.C.C. is allowed and WPS

¶28

No.8542/2023 {Geeta Ram Netam Versus State of Chhattisgarh} is directed to be restored in its original number.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶31

Deepti Jha