Budhiyaro v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPCR No. 251 of 2017 • Budhiyaro W/o Janak Ram Aged About 61 Years R/o Subhash Colony, Domanhil, Post Domanhil, Tahsill Khadgawa, Civil And Revenue District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Department Of Home Affairs Police Mantralaya New Raipur, Civil And Revenue District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh

2. Director General Of Police, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. , District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Inspector General Of Police, Range Koriya, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh. , District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

4. Superintendent Of Police, Koriya,civil And Revenue District Koriya, Chhattisgarh., District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

5. The District Magistrate , Koriay, Koriya,civil And Revenue District Koriya, Chhattisgarh., District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

6. The Station House Officer Police Station Chirmiri, Civil And Revenue District Koriya, Chhattisgarh., District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

7. Station House Officer Police Station Kotwali, Civil And Revenue District Bemetara , Chhattisgarh., District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh

8. Station House Officer Police Station Beral, Civil And Revenue District - Bemetara, Chhattisgarh., District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh

9. Bhojraj, S/o Ramsohagi, R/o Village Parsada, Civil And Revenue District - Bemetara, Chhattisgarh., District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh 10.BN Gold Real Estate And Allied Ltd. Regn. And Corp. Office 1112-1114, 1th Floor, Rg. Trade Tower, B-7, Netaji Subhash Place, Kpithampur, New Delhi, 34, Delhi ---- Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For petitioner :

Mr. Punit Ruparal, Advocate.

For State.

:

Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board

17-06-2021

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has filed this petition with a prayer that the respondents authority/respondents No. 6 to 8 be directed to register FIR against respondents No. 9 & 10 for offence committed by them. He would further submit that by efflux of time, this petition has become infructuous because FIR has been registered against respondents No. 9 & 10 for offence committed by them which is evident from Annexure R/1.

2. In view of the aforesaid statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Raju