Reported Judgement's

Party Name	Case No.	Decided on	Coram	Subject Matter	Point decided
Himanshu Namdeo and Others Vs Dena Bank and Others	WA No. 188 of 2016	19.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Ho’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Service Matter	(I) Legal heirs of missing employee, who sustained a civil death, are entitled to get his retiral dues including gratuity, provident fund, leave encashment and family pension etc. (ii) Charge-sheet not served to the missing employee – he can only be terminated/ removed simplicitor from service without any reference or finding of guilt.
Ashutosh Agrawal and Another Vs. Union of India and Others	WA No. 7, 9 of 2009 and WA No. 819 of 2018	06.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Ho’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Indian Stamp Act, 1899 National Highways Act, 1956 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 And Acquisition Act, 1894 Chhattisgarh Preparation and Revision of Market Value Guideline Rules, 2000	Compulsory acquisition of private property – minimum value as stipulated for fixing stamp duty in respect of the conveyance to be registered cannot be sole basis for computation of compensation and the bonafide purchaser can show the actual value in a deed of conveyance which may be of much higher than the minimum value and compensation should be worked out accordingly.
Radhelal Rathiya and Others Vs Union of India and Others	WP PIL 126 of 2016	06.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Ho’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013- Sec.16(2) Railways Act, 1989-Sec.2(7A), 2(37A) National Highways Act, 1956-Sec.3J And Acquisition Act, 1894	(I) The Act of 2013 extends the benefit not only to the land owners whose lands are acquired, but also other classes/ categories as well. (ii)There cannot be any circular or instructions contrary to mandate of the statute.
M/s BSCPL Infrastructure Ltd. Vs State of Chhattsigarh and Others	WA No. 408, 395, 403, 404, 405, 406, 407 and 411 of 2019	06.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Ho’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957-Sec.21(5, 23(A) Chhattisgarh Minor Mineral Rules, 1996- Rule 53(5) Chhattisgarh Minor Mineral Rules, 2015- Rule1(2) Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 -Sec.247(7)	Provisions of Section 247 of CGLRC will not be attracted in case of mineral extracted or removed from the land of private owners and will be governed by the C.G. Minor Mineral Rules, 2015.
Shri Amolak Singh Bhatia Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) and Others	WA No. 584 of 2019	19.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Ho’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Income Tax Act, 1961- Sec.132, 127, 153A and 142(1), 119 Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006- Sec.2 (1)	As per proviso to Section 2(1) of the Act, 2006, no appeal is maintainable against an interim order passed by the single bench.
Shiv Prasad Choure Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CR.A. No. 1148 of 2014http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/CRA1148_14(26.11.19).pdf	19.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Hob’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	IPC-Sec.302, 300, 86, 304	*A person committing offence in an inebriated condition is liable to be dealt with as if he had same knowledge as he would have had if he had not been intoxicated, as provided under Section 86 IPC. However, he cannot be presumed to have the same intention because knowledge to commit the offence is different than the intention to commit offence.
Vijay Kumar Gupta Vs Smt. Kiran Bala	FAM No. 138 of 2012 and FA No. 116 of 2003	29.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 -Sec.13(1), 9 Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Sec.17 Cr.P.C. - Sec.151	Applicant/wife kept on making all efforts to resume normal marital life has been proved – decree of conjugal rights – not interfered with.
Parmanand Sai Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPS No. 1522, 4403, 4951 and 5392 of 2017 alongwith WPS No. 2548 of 2016 and WPS No. 3665 of 2015 and WPS No. 6519 of 2014	06.04.2018	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra	Constitution Of India - Article 14, 16 and 226	Seniority - The averment and the relief claimed should be specifically corresponding to any statutory or constitutional right.
Vikash Kumar Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPS No. 4445 of 2008	21.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra	IPC- Sec.147, 148, 149, 294, 506 and 323	*In cases of suppression of material information in the verification form the ultimate action should be based on objective criteria on due consideration of all relevant aspects. It should not be mechanical. In trivial cases employer may, in its discretion, ignore such suppression of fact by condoning the lapse.
Madangopal Byas (Dead) through Lrs and Another Vs Siriya and Others	SA No. 338 of 2003	31.07.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava		Permanent injunction restraining from interfering with the possession cannot be sought against the co-sharer.
Ramsarikh Tiwari (Dead) Through Lrs. Dhanajay Tiwari Vs Ramnarayan Tiwari (Dead) Through Lrs Gajendra Tiwari and Others	SA No. 516 of 2003	19.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava	Hindu Succession Act,1956- Sec.15 (2) (b) with Sec.16, Rule 3 M.P. Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950-Sec.54 Limitation Act-Article 65 Central Provinces Land Revenue Act, 1917 –Sec.109 M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1954- Sec.147 (a)	(I) Despite order of settlement passed under Section 54 of the Act of 1951 in the name of one of the family members, it can be established that the property was a joint family property by appropriate pleadings and evidence. (ii)Suit to seek partition of the joint family property – limitation will not start running from the date of order of allotment made in favour of one of the members of the joint family.
Sobran (Died) Through Lrs. Vs Smt. Keshar Devi (Died) Through Lrs. And Another	SA No. 343 of 2002	21.08.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava	Code of Civil Procedure, 1908- Order 2 Rule 2	(I) If the cause of action are different, provisions of Order 2 Rule 2 CPC cannot be invoked to bar a subsequent suit. (ii)Adverse Possession – The defendant has to plead and prove his continuous hostile possession of the property to the plaintiff's claim.
Ajay Chouhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Another	WP No. 415 of 2002	29.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri	Municipal Corporation Act, 1956- Sec.421(4), 417(2) Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation (Transfer of Immovable Property ) Rules, 1994	Grant of lease of public property – finding of suggestive discrimination by the State due to publication was not made in the widely circulated paper – sufficient material have not been placed to overcome such finding – petition dismissed holding that bonafide ends cannot be achieved by questionable means when the State or its instrumentalities are involved.
Smt. Kashi Bai Khare Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPS No. 3142 of 2015	02.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri		CPF was deducted from the salary of employee while serving with the Janpad Panchayat – Thereafter services of employee absorbed in the State Government - The service rendered by the employee as a whole be counted as continuous service to calculate the pensionary benefits as the employee cannot be deprived of the benefits for wrong committed by the employer.
Parmeshwar Yadav and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPS No. 8633 of 2019 (bunch of 45 other Cases)	12.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri	Chhattisgarh Police Executive Force Constable (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2007 Constitution of India- Article 14, 309	Selection list not published – The candidate does not get a right to be enforced by mandamus unless and until gets a letter of appointment,
Noharlal Koshewada Vs The Accountant General (Lekha and Hakrasi)	WPS No. 3601 of 2018	11.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri	Constitution Of India - Article 19, 21, 226, 227	Delay to pay legal dues of retired employee for 45 years would only show the apathy of the few of the employees who sunk deep into meditative trance for such a long period – Compound interest @ 12% per annum was awarded on the GPF amount from the date of retirement till the actual payment is made – Further compensation of Rupees one lakh also awarded with a direction that the amounts awarded to be paid within 45 days from the date of order.
Sidar (Died) Through Lrs. Smt. Sukhmati and Others Vs Ganeshram and Others	SA No. 202 of 2007http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/SA202_07(18.11.19).pdf	18.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Code of Civil Procedure, Sec.100 Registration of Births and Deaths Madhya Pradesh Rules, 1973 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Sec.-35	(I) Death certificate issued only on the basis of applications and affidavits without verifying the facts stated therein – No evidential value attached with such certificate. (ii) If a document comes into existence during pendency of the suit including public document, the Court has to scrutinise and assess the evidentiary value with great care and caution.
Sunita Biswal Vs H.K. Praganiha	CRMP No. 2254 of 2019http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/CRMP2254_19(20.11.19).pdf	20.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, Sec.-138, 20, 45 Evidence Act, 1872 Sec.-45	Signature on the disputed cheque has been admitted by the accused – no need for examination by hand writing expert.
Jagnnath Prasad Vs Ashish Kumar Sahu	CRMP No. 2439 of 2018http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/CRMP2439_18(21.11.19).pdf	21.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, Sec.-138, 142(1)(b) Cr.P.C. Sec.-482	Complaint is barred by limitation – application made under proviso to Section 142(1)(b) of the Act to condone the delay without supporting affidavit – trial as well as revisional Court dismissed the application – the trial Magistrate ought to have granted an opportunity to file affidavit to establish the sufficient cause to condone the delay.
Devendra Chandra Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRMP No. 2444 of 2019http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/CRMP2444_19(15.11.19).pdf	15.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Indian Penal Code, Sec.489A, 489B, 489C, 489D, 255, 256, and 120B Cr.P.C. Sec-207, 167, 482, 173	Non-supply of charge-sheet to the accused would not make him entitled to get the relief under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Subha Jakkanwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRMP No. 1614 of 2017http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/CRMP1614_17(26.11.19).pdf	26.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	IPC-Sec.420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B Cr.P.C.- Sec.482, 161	*An Advocate cannot be prosecuted for Criminal offences for non-exhibiting greater professional care and competence while submitting non-encumbrance certificate to a Bank.
Hari Prasad (Dead) Through Lrs. Vs State of Chhattisgarh	SA No. 437 of 2008http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/SA437_08(29.11.19).pdf	29.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959- Sec.257(f) Code of Civil Procedure- Sec.80	(I) The State Government has no jurisdiction to enter the name of the Collector in the Revenue Record relating to the property of a private temple. (ii)Correction of revenue entries in such matters, Civil Suit is maintainable and will not hit by Section 257 of the CGLRC.
Piyari Bai (Died and deleted) Vs Navratan Das	SA No. 155 of 2009http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/SA155_09(21.11.19).pdf	21.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956-Sec.5(2), 7, 10, 11 (iv), 16 Limitation Act, 1963-Art.58	(I) For a valid adoption, physical act of giving and taking is an essential requisite. (ii)Adoption makes in contravention of the provisions of the Act shall be void and consent of the adopting mother is necessary in adoption made by her husband.
Smt. Tulsabai (Dead) through Lrs. and Another Vs. Savitri Bai and Others	SA No. 438 of 2007	25.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Code of Civil Procedure, 1908- Sec.11, 100	If there is no adjudication with regard to the suit land in earlier suit, principle of resjudicata would not be applicable against the subsequent suit claiming title over the suit-land.
Smt. Kawaljeet Kaur @ Khushbu Dua Vs Surjeet Dua and Others	CRMP No. 2354 of 2019	06.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007- Sec.24	The parents who have not completed 60 years of age cannot maintain a complaint before the Magistrate under the Act of 2007.
Jal Singh (Dead) Through Lrs Vs Kamli Bai and Others	SA No. 535 of 2006	10.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Evidence Act, 1872-Sec.58 Cr.P.C., 1973-Sec.125(1) Hindu Succession Act, 1956 -Sec.8(a) C.P.C., 1908-Order13 Rule 4	Admitted fact is not required to be proved by virtue of Section 58 of the Evidence Act –Execution of sale deed admitted – Non-marking of sale deed as exhibit is mere an irregularity – Sale- deed can be relied upon.
Munni Bai @ Bisahin Bai and Others Vs Sahulal and Others	SA No. 435 of 2006	06.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	CPC-Order 7 Rule 7, Sec.100, Order 6 Rule 17 Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Sec.15	The party cannot be granted unclaimed relief if granting such relief would result in serious prejudice to the interested party and deprived him of valuable rights available under the statute.
Hemant @ Bhagdan Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WP(Cr.) No. 1127 of 2019	06.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Chhattisgarh Prisoner's Leave Rules, 1989- Rule 4, 6 Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.302 with 34 and 324	*Object of granting leave/ parole highlighted and the District Magistrates to decide the application as per the instructions dated 3-12-2019 issued by the Chief Secretary.
Khomanlal Chandrakar (died) Through Lrs Vs Tarendra Kumar and Another	SA No. 443 of 2006	10.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Sec.39, 34 CPC- Sec.100, 39, 96	Bare suit for mandatory injunction against co-owner is not maintainable without seeking relief of declaration of title and possession.
Firoz Siddiqui Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRMP No. 2402 of 2019	09.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Cr.P.C. - Sec.482, 93(1)(c), 2(h), 2(g) IPC-Sec.384, 120B with Sec.34	Request for issuance of search warrant should not be disposed of in a mechanical way by a laconic order and some justifiable reasons must be recorded.
Manoj Agrawal and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WP(Cr.) No. 107 of 2018	13.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.147, 148 & 302 Arms Act- Sec.25 & 27 M.P. Prisoner's Release on Probation Rules, 1964- Rule 4	Remission of sentence by the State – The refusal order must reflect application of mind to the relevant consideration.
Tulsabai (Dead) Through Lrs. Vs Ganesh Ram and Others	SA No. 680 of 2018	25.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Code of Civil Procedure, 1908- Sec.11 Indian Evidence Act, 1872- Sec.68 Ransfer of Property Act- Sec.54	(I) Principle of merger - Only operative decree merged with the decree passed by the First Appellate Court not the reasoning given by the Trial Court. (ii)Provision of Section 68 of the Evidence Act does not apply to sale deed which is governed by Section 54 of the T.P. Act, and therefore, certified copy of the registered sale deed is admissible in evidence and does not need to be proved by calling a witness.
Prashant Kumar Kathale Vs. Vice Chancellor Guru Ghasidas Central University	WPC No. 4342 of 2019	29.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy		Short fall attendance to appear in exam – minimum attendance is of 75% whereas the petitioner has only 49.33% - petition rejected – permitting the student on mere sympathy by overlooking the legal requirements would breed more violations in the hope of being condoned which ultimately would disturb the discipline and adversely affect the academic standards as well.
Mohitram Patel and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPC No. 801, 52 and 966 of 2018	29.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy	Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959- Sec.247(3 Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Rules, 2014 Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 Mines and Minerals Development and Regulations Act, 1957	(I) Grant of surface right challenged after almost 7 years – petition suffers with delay and latches. (ii)After enactment of the MMDR Act, 1957, Section 247 of CG LRC is not applicable to grant of surface right/mining lease.
Suresh Kumra Agarwal Vs Dy./Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others	WPT No. 135 of 2019	05.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy	Income Tax Act, 1964- Sec.147, 151	Re-assessment of Income Tax under Section 147 of the Act can be initiated second time also if income escaped from the earlier assessment.
Miss. Himani Baghel Vs Bhimsen and Ors.	MAC No. 324 of 2014	06.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Sec.173, 166 I.P.C. -Sec.279, 337, 338	Seizure of offending vehicle much after occurrence of the alleged accident, is no ground for disbelieving the involvement of it in the accident.
Chumman Lal Sahu & Anr. Vs Gopal Ji Singh & Ors.	MA (C) No. 369 of 2013	29.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Sec.173, 7 Entral Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989- Rule 3	Offending vehicle was being driven by the holder of learner driving licence with instructor holding a valid and effective driving licence – Tribunal has not committed any illegality by fastening the liability over the Insurance Company.
National Insurence Company Limited Vs Smt. Anita Bai and Others	MA(C) No. 1107 of 2014	13.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal	Employees Compensation Act, 1923- Sec.10, 22, 4-A Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.14	“Pay and Recover” ordered as the offending vehicle was being driven by the person without getting his driving licence renewed.
Dikesh Sahu Vs. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Nagri and Others	WP(227) No. 1032 of 2018	02.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant	Code of Civil Procedure, 1908- Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 with Sec.151	No injunction can be granted against the true owner at the instance of person in unlawful possession.
Javed Siddiqi Vs Smt. Sashikala Perule	FA No. 538 of 2018	19.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	Limitation Act- Sec.5	Appellant/tenant aged about 50 years and is not suffering with any health problem and tried to avoid execution proceedings, is not entitled to have delay of 7½ months condoned.
Smt. Pushpa Masih Vs Kamlesh Masih	TPC No. 76 of 2019	09.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	Code of Civil Procedure, 1908- Sec.24	Case is transferred from Family Court, Balodabazar to the Family Court, Jagdalpur as the conveyance of the wife is to be preferred over the husband.
Suleman Mohammad Vs Mohammad Nazim Khan and another	FA No. 356 of 2019	09.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	Limitation Act- Sec.5 Code of Civil Procedure-Order 41 Rule 5, Sec.151	The appellant is not too old with no disability has filed appeal with a delay of 30 days on the pretext of summer vacation and non-availability of his counsel – is not sufficient cause to show his bona fide – delay not condoned.
Smt. Pragya Agrawal Vs Ankit Agrawal	TPC No. 8 of 2019	04.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	Civil Procedure Code- Sec.24 Hindu Marriage Act, 1995- Sec.13	Case is transferred considering the convenience of the applicant/wife.
Smt. Deepika Goyal Vs Shri Amit Kumar Agrawal	TPC No. 39 of 2019	04.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	Civil Procedure Code- Sec.24 Hindu Marriage Act, 1995- Sec.13 Cr.P.C. - Sec.125	The applicant is getting interim maintenance as well as expenses for each and every appearance before the Family Court – Transfer Petition rejected.
Vishnu Nandi Vs State of Chhattisgarh	Cr.A. No. 465 of 2011http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/CA465_11(25.11.19).pdf	25.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel	IPC- Sec.366, 368 Cr.P.C. -Sec.313	The prosecutrix herself willingly went out along with the accused and resided for 13 days in a rented room – conviction cannot be upheld.
State of Chhattisgarh Vs Chandrabbushan Shukla	Acquittal Appeal No. 150 of 2011	04.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel	Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988-Sec.13(1)(e) with 13(2) Cr.P.C.-Sec.313	(I) Finding of acquittal should not be interfered with lightly. (ii)Documentary evidence not produced to establish income of the accused and his disproportionate property during alleged period – acquittal proper.
Jaiprakash Prajapati Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 373 and 500 of 2017	02.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel	Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985-Sec.20(b)(ii)(C), 52A, 42, 55, 57 Cr.P.C.-Sec.161, 313	The prosecution has complied with all the mandatory provisions of the Act – defence witnesses though admitted their signatures, have not supported the case of the prosecution – evidence of other prosecution witnesses including police is reliable - conviction is proper.
Bhuvneshwar Kumhar and Another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 251 and 327 of 2015	17.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel	Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.20, 498A, 304B	Money was demanded to purchase a motorcycle – no evidence to show harassment or ill-treatment of the deceased for that demand – conviction not proper.
Smt. Sheela Banjare Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 514, 515 and 717 of 2013	12.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel	Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.366, 363, 376 Cr.P.C.- Sec.161, 313	The prosecutrix visited and stayed at various places along with the accused for about 3 months, the fact of forcibly taken away has not been reported at the time of recording of the missing report – Conviction set aside.
Jaspal Singh and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 734 and 791 of 2011	10.12.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel	Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985-Sec.20(b)(ii)(C), 42, 50, 52 and 55 Cr.P.C.- 313	Independent witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution – Serious omissions and contradictions regarding quantity of sample packets and sending the same to FSL – In these circumstances, the Statements of Investigating Officer and other police witnesses are not reliable.
Madhaw and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh	Cr.A No. 191 of 2002 and CRA No. 1187 of 2003http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/CA191_02(07.11.19).pdf	07.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Indian Penal Code, Sec.395, 367 Arms Act, Sec.27 Cr.P.C. Sec.437-A	Witness identified the accused in TIP but failed in dock identification – Not reliable – Memorandum and Seizure have not been proved – MLC not produced – Conviction cannot be sustained.
Bajaj Allainz General insurence Company Ltd., Raipur Vs Pushpa Bai and Others	MAC No. 434 and 435 of 2013http://cg.nic.in/hcbspjudgement/judgements_web/MA(C)434_13(01.04.19).pdf	01.04.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Sec.166, 173	Permit and driving licence have been duly proved – Tribunal has rightly fastened the liability upon the Insurance Company.
United India Insurence Company Ltd., Sarguja Vs Dineshwar Das and Others	MAC No. 408 of 2015	13.03.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Sec.173	Penal interest on the compensation amount, is not legally sustainable.
Prafull Swarup Verma Vs. Narayan Nishad and Others	MAC No. 438 of 2014	19.06.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Sec.166	Permanent disability certificate neither issued by the competent Board nor by the Doctor who treated the claimant and was issued by the retired doctor after examination of the claimant – can be relied upon to assess the compensation.
Ramnath Vs State of Madhya Pradesh (Now CG)	CRA No. 491 of 1998	26.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.304B, 498A Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961-Sec.4 Evidence Act- Sec.113B	Death of married woman due to hanging on tree in a forest – missing report lodged by brother of deceased do not contain harassment or ill-treatment by her in-laws for dowry – conviction cannot be sustained.
Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Now C.G.)	CRA No. 1670 of 1998	24.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Indian Penal Code, 1860-363, 366, 376, 34 Cr.P.C.- Sec.313, 437-A	Prosecutrix was below the age of 16 years - not proved - and was consenting party and did not make any hue and cry - conviction set aside.
Jitendra and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 419 of 2002	01.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.306/34, 107 Cr.P.C.-Sec.313	Suicide by concubine by itself is not sufficient to constitute instigation to bring home the charge of abatement of suicide.
The Oriental Insurence Company Limited, Korba Vs Smt. Champa Bai and Others	MAC No. 1128 of 2014	07.03.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Sec.163-A, 167 Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923	Death of driver of offending vehicle – petition under Section 163-A of the M.V. Act is maintainable on behalf of his Lrs.
The oriental Insurence Company Limited, Bilaspur Vs Smt. Tulsi Bai and Others	MAC No. 1281 of 2014	10.04.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Sec.173, 3/181 Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.279, 337, 304-A CPC- Order 41 Rule 27	Offending vehicle being driven by the driver not having a valid and effective driving licence - “Pay and Recover” ordered.
Smt. Sita Chandel Vs Aisthir Ram Sahu and Others	MAC No. 893 of 2013	07.05.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 Sec.166 Indian Penal Code – Sec.304A	Contributory negligence – Finding recorded by the Tribunal is set aside as being perverse – Compensation enhanced.
Rajkumar Patel and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 258 of 2001	05.12.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Vimla Singh Kapoor	Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.304B	Deceased never complained to any one regarding demand made by the accused – No evidence to show the deceased was subjected to cruelty – Accused acquitted.
Mahendra Kumar and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRR No. 347 of 2007	11.12.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Vimla Singh Kapoor	Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.306/34, 107	Charge framed after considering the prima-facie material available on record which constitutes alleged offence – No interference is required.
Naveen Kumar and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 370 of 2009	11.12.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Vimla Singh Kapoor	Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sec.304B, 498A, 34 Cr.P.C.- Sec.313	Evidence of the parents and friend of the deceased are self-contradictory in material particulars Not sufficient to uphold the conviction.
Amarnath Banerjee Vs Ravindra Singh Bedi and Anothers	CRR No. 558 of 2011	16.12.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey	Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881- Sec.138, 139 Cr.P.C. - Sec.313	If a cheque is returned with an endorsement 'account is closed', it would amount to returning the cheque unpaid due to insufficient amount to honour the cheque under Section 138 of the Act.