← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPCR/76/2015dismissed

Rajesh Sunderlal Bahl And ORS. v. The State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

2017-02-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPCR No.76 of 2015

1. Rajesh Sunderlal Bahl S/o Late Dr. Sunderlal Bahl Aged About 63 Years Director Of Geo-Chem Laboratories Private Limited, Having Address At GeoChem House, 294, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg, Fort, Mumbai 400001

2. Neel Rajesh Bahl S/o Rajesh Sunderlal Bahl, Aged About 36 Years Director Of Geo-Chem Laboratories Private Limited, Having Address At Geo-Chem House, 294, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg, Fort, Mumbai 400001

3. Anish Dinesh Bahl S/o Late Mr. Dinesh Bahl, Aged About 38 Years Director Of Geo-Chem Laboratories Private Limited, Having Address At Geo Chem House, 294, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg, Fort, Mumbai 400001

4. Rajiv Sunderlal Bahl S/o Late Dr. Sunderlal Bahl Aged About 52 Years Having Address At 94, Sunflower Apartment, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400005 ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Superintendent Of Police, Special Investigation Cell, P.S. Civil Lines, Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Hira Steels Limited Through: Mr. Arun Poddar, G-16, Hira Arcade, New Bus Stand Pandari, Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Smt. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Neeraj Jain, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 23/02/2017 Heard.

2.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the FIR, pursuant to which, various coercive processes for attendance of the petitioner were initiated, which led to filing of this petition, has now been quashed by the Supreme Court, therefore, the petition is rendered infructuous.

3.

The petitioner may inform the concerned authorities involved in the process of arrest or detention of the petitioner regarding the order passed by the Supreme Court. The petitioner may bring to the notice of the State authorities regarding order dated 30-09-2016 passed by the Supreme Court.

4.

With the aforesaid observations, the petition is finally disposed off having rendered infructuous, though with liberty to revive, if grievance raised in the petition remains unredressed.

SD/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Tumane