Syed Rashid Hashmi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home and Police Department, Sachivalay/ Mantralay Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

2 - The Director General of Police Police Head Quarter, Naya Raipur, Dist.- Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

3 - The Superintendent of Police Raipur, Dist.- Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

4 - The Station House Officer of The Police Station- Ganj Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr. Sameer Rigri, Advocate For State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. GA

¶15

Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶16

Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge

¶17

Order on Board

¶18

Per, Ramesh Sinha, CJ.

¶19

05/01/2026

¶20

Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH ASHUTOSH MISHRA MISHRA Date: 2026.01.05 18:23:13 +0530

¶21

2 / 5

¶22

Heard Mr. Sameer Rigri, Advocate for the Petitioner as well as Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the respondents/State.

¶23

The instant petition has been filed for seeking a direction towards the police authority to serve the production warrant to the petitioner who is languishing in District Jail Aligarh (U.P.) since 2019.

¶24

By way of the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶25

(i) It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to the Police Authority to comply with order of order of learned Trial Court dated 22.05.2024, 07.02.2025 & 03.05.2025 to serve the production warrant to the petitioner, in the interest of Justice.

¶26

(ii) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be please to direct the Respondent Authority to serve the production warrant/arrest the petitioner in the crime no. 57/2018 of P.S. Ganj, District- Raipur (C.G.), and the petitioner may also be permitted to appear through the video conferencing from the District - Jail, Aligarh in a trial/evidence pending before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur (C.G.) in

¶27

3 / 5

¶28

criminal Case No.3199/2018 in the interest of justice.

¶29

(iii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be also granted.

¶30

The brief facts of the case as projected by the petitioner are that a report was made by Pareshwar Dewangan that he along with others on the allurement made by the persons of K.M.J. Land Developers India Ltd. had deposited certain amounts in the said company with an assurance of returning the deposits with high returns. However subsequently the Company was closed and the amounts of the depositors including that of the complainant were not returned. It is also the case of the prosecution that the money was circulated without permission of the RBI or SEBI, thereby the offence has been committed. On the basis of aforesaid story of the prosecution in connection with Crime No.57/2018 registered in Police Station Ganj District Raipur (C.G.) for offence punishable under sections 406, 409, 420 and 120 B of Indian Penal Code read with section 4, 5 & 6 of the Prize Chits & Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 has been registered against the present petitioner and other co-accused. The present petitioner is languishing in jail since 07.11.2019 in other crime number pending before the Court of other State, which is apparent from the bail order granted to the petitioner in crime no.638/2019 of P.S.Kotwali Nagar, District- Raebareli (U.P.). The Court has directed

¶31

4 / 5

¶32

various times to the Police Authority to produce the petitioner through the production warrant in crime no.57/2018 registered at Police Station Ganj, District- Raipur (C.G.), but not even a single step has been taken by the Respondent authority. Hence this petition.

¶33

At the very outset learned State counsel would submit that in compliance of the order dated 11/12/2025 passed by this Court he has placed before this Court copy of the letter dated 04/01/2026 issued by the SHO, Police Station Ganj, District Raipur addressed to the learned Advocate General, State of Chhattisgarh wherein it has been stated that “ currently, it has been found that the accused is detained in Aligarh district, Uttar Pradesh. In this regard, the District Jail Superintendent of Aligarh district, Uttar Pradesh has been informed through a report for further action. The presence of the accused will be ensured before the Honorable Trial Court on the next scheduled date in the case, either in person or through video conferencing ” and would submit that in view of the aforesaid report nothing survives for further adjudication in the present writ petition and the instant writ petition can be disposed of.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection.

¶35

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel and also perused the report/letter dated 04/01/2026, the same is taken on record.

¶36

5 / 5

¶37

In view of the aforesaid report, nothing further survives for adjudication in the present petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶38

SD/SD/-

¶39

(Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶40

ashu

Syed Rashid Hashmi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Rashid Hashmi 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

Pravin Ratnaparkhi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Devraj Dhruw Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Indrajeet Chaudhari Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Pawan Kumar Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Surit Ram Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Sindhu Vaishnav Vs State of Chhattisgarh