Reported Judgment's

Party Name	Case No.	Decided on	Coram	Subject Matter	Point decided
Chandrakant Giri Goswami Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPS No. 2873, 510 and 2887 of 2019	24.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Scheduled II to Rule 6 of the Chhattisgarh Lok Abhiyojan (Rajpatrit) Bharti Evam Padonnati Niyam, 2008	(I) Fixing upper age limit of 40 years for promotion as ADPPO from A.G.-III having Law degree with 7 years experience – irrational – lack of nexus to the object sought to be achieved - Arbitrary and discriminatory and therefore, violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. (ii) Process of acquisition of knowledge – following stranga in Sanskrit relied upon: ^^आचार्यात् पादमादत्ते पादम शिष्यः स्वमेधया । पादम सब्रह्राचारिभ्यात्ः पादम कालक्रमेण चः ॥^^ “A person acquires one-fourth of the knowledge from the teachers, one-fourth by himself, one-fourth from the colleagues and remaining one-fourth, by the passage of time.”
Vikas Raj Vs High Court of Chhattisgarh and Another	WA No. 451 of 2019	05.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu		(I) Affected parties are not included in the array of party – challenge to process of selection – not tenable. (ii) English and Hindi skill test – Minimum cut-off marks prescribed – separate Minimum Marks in respect of English and Hindi skill test was not prescribed – challenge thereof not entertained as process of selection was completed and appointment has been made – direction given - “Separate Minimum cut-off marks shall be stipulated in the next process of selection onwards.”
U.K. Shrivastava Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WA No. 224 and 252 of 2019	24.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Rule 8 under the head rule of professional ethics	(I) Government aided private college - Professor superannuated on attaining the age of 60 years though age of retirement raised to 62 years by the Government - illegal – entitled for salary for the period denied to serve. (ii)An advocate being member of the Executive Committee or the Committee by whichever name for the time is vested with general management of the affairs of Organisation or Institution is barred from making appearance on behalf or against the same Organisation or Institution.
Abhishek Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPPILNo. 111 of 2016	11.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Constitution of India under Article- 14, Art-226, Art-32 High Court of Chhattisgarh Rules,2007- Rule.81	Rule 81 of the High Court of Chhattisgarh Rules, 2007 requiring deposit of an amount of Rs.5000/- towards security is not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Century Textiles and Industries Ltd. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPC No. 2744 of 2017	11.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Registration Act, 1908-Sec.64 to 67 Companies Act,1956 Indian Stamp Act, 1899-Sec. 6A,19A & 48B	(I) Collector of Stamps, Raipur directed to deposit deficit stamp duty on the mortgage deed executed at Mumbai – neither instrument nor its copy was available to the Collector Stamps, Raipur – Instrument cannot be charged under Section 19-A of the Act, 1899 and it only comes into play when a copy of instrument produced before him. (ii)Collector of Stamps cannot direct production of original instrument. (iii)Section 48 (B) of the Act is not discriminatory and violative of articles 14 & 19.
Manoj Vishwakarma Vs State of Chhattisgarh	WA No. 478 of 2019	11.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code,1959- Sec.104, Sec.24 & 22	Sub-Divisional Officer is competent to transfer Patwari.
Sri Ravi Agrawal Vs Union of India and Others	WPT No. 77 of 2019	20.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017- Sec.3(2)with sec.5, 168, 167, Sec.2(91) with Sec.70 General Clauses Act, 1897-Sec.3(39)	“Proper Officer” under CGST Act – Notification showing as issued by the 'Board' stands corrected as issued by the 'Government' – Proper – Challenge to Circular & Notification – Repelled.
State of Chhattisgarh and another Vs National Investigation Agency	WA No. 511 of 2019	20.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	National Investigation Agency Act, 2008-Sec.6(1), 10, 21 IPC Sec.149, 148, 302, 396, 307 and 120-B	(I) Power of State Government to investigate the Scheduled Offences under the NIA Act is subject to the power of Central Government provided under Section 6 of the NIA Act. (ii)Once investigation of Scheduled Offences is entrusted with the NIA by the Central Government, the State Government becomes functus officio.
Ku. Nivedita Soni Vs Yogesh Kumar Agrawal and Others	WA No. 521 of 2019 with WPC No. 3633 of 2019	18.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri P.R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice and Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu	Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act , 2006- Sec.2(1) Constitution of India- Art.226 Right to Information Act, 2005	(I)Installation of petrolium outlet – Locus – Action under challenge not shown to prejudice the rights & interest of the petitioner – Petitioner raised voice after 5 years – Writ not liable to be entertained. (ii)'Rural Retail Outlets' shall not be located on the side of the Highways (National/State).
Sanjay and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 752 of 2012	23.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Hon’ble Shri Gautam Chourdiya	Cr.P.C. Sec 313 I.P.C. Sec 302/34, 323	To attract mischief of Section 34 of IPC, only common intention to commit an offence and participation in commission of the offence has to be established and overt-act on part of some of the persons sharing the common intention is not necessary.
Manglu Ram and Other Vs Sukhu Ram and Others	FA No. 262 of 2016	26.08.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Code of Civil procedure, Order 41 Rules 27	Deed of relinquishment of right in respect of immovable property is not admissible in evidence though it could be relied upon for collateral purposes of severance of title
M/s Siddhu Construction Company Vs Employees State Insurence Corporation, Raipur	M.A. No. 13 of 2019	26.08.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 – Sec.82, Sec.75, Sec.45	Under Section 45-A of the ESI Act, 1948, the appropriate authority can recover dues both from the principal employer as also the immediate employer.
State of Chhattisgarh and Another Vs Ayodhya Prasad Dubey	FAM No. 102 of 2015	20.08.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Land Acqusition Act 1894-Sec.4(1), Sec.23 & 24	Land acquisition – enhancement of compensation – onus to prove entitlement to receive higher compensation is upon the claimant – sale deed showing higher rate of land should have been filed to ascertain market value of the land as on the date of issuance of notification under the Act, 1894.
Producin Pvt. Ltd. Vs Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (T & D) Cooperative Federation Limited Raipur and Others	FA No. 361, 299 and 360 of 2019	23.08.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Coperative Society Act,1960- Sec.94	Preliminary issue of jurisdiction depending upon law and facts both should not be adjudicated without allowing the parties to lead oral as well as documentary evidence.
Kamleshwar Prasad Trivedi (Dead) Through Lrs. And Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPS No. 2538 of 2007	17.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra		A delinquent employee cannot be subjected to major penalty of removal from service on the charge of attending duties in a drunken condition when was not sent for medical examination to prove consumption of alcohol.
Noni Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPC No. 3163 of 2018	23.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra	Right to Information Act, 2005 Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959- Sec.248, Sec.246	(I) Section 246 of Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 – every person who lawfully holds any land as a house site in the abadi or who may lawfully acquire such land shall be a bhumiswami in respect of such land. (ii) Illegal demolition of house – compensation of Rs. 5 lacs granted to the petitioner – State to recover the said amount from erring officer after constituting Departmental enquiry.
Smt. Kanti Mishra and Other Vs Rajendra Shankar Shukla and Others	SA No. 782 of 1998	14.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra	Chhattisgarh Accomodation Control Act ,1961-Sec.12 C.P.C,1908 – Sec.100 Chhattisgarh Abolition of Proprietary Rights(Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands)Acts,1950 Hindu Succession Act,1956 -Sec.15(2)(b)	(I) In a suit for eviction, execution of will cannot be challenged as being impermissible in law; (ii)A Hindu woman once became absolute owner of the property by virtue of Section 14 of the Act, 1956 can execute the WILL in favour of any person as per her own desire.
In Reference of State of Chhattisgarh Vs Shankar Haldhar	CR.REF No. 2 of 2017 and CRA No. 1963 of 2017	14.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra	C.P.C.- Sec. 366, 370 & 392 I.P.C. Sec 302(thrice), 342 & 406 Arms Act-Sec.25 & 27(1)	*The 3rd Judge to whom criminal appeal is referred upon difference of opinion amongst judges of the Division Bench is entitled to hear and decide the matter afresh, the third judge is not bound to follow one or the other judgement rendered by the judges of the Division Bench.
K.P. Tiwari Vs Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company	WPS No. 3158 of 2007	07.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra	Chhattisgarh Civil Services Leave Rules, 1977 -Section 2(1)(c) & Rule 25 Pension Rule 1976-Rule 42(1)(a)	*A work charged employee regularised subsequently is not entitled for leave encashment for the period rendered in the work charge establishment.
Prahalad Singh Gunwan Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPS No. 5350 of 2009	24.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra	C.G. Vidhi avam Vidhayi (Nirwachan) Karya Vibhag ke Dwitiya, Tritiya Shreni (Lipik Vargiya) Nirwachan Sewa Bharti Niyam,1976	*Prescribing the minimum bench mark to ascertain the minimum necessary merit and thereafter, making promotion on the basis of seniority- cum-merit amongst the qualified candidates does not offend the principle of seniority- cum-merit
State of Chhattisgarh Through the Colloctor of Stamps, Ambikapur Vs Sourabh Agrawal	WPC No. 6662 of 2007	28.08.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava	Indian Stamp Act-1899, Sec.47-A(3) M.P./C.G. Preparation and Revision of Market Value Guideline Rules, 2000 Indian Stamp Act (M.P./C.G. Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules 1975	Registration fees of the gift deed - The Collector of Stamps is not bound by the market value prescribed in guide-line issued by the Central Valuation Board and has to hold a proper enquiry after affording due opportunity to the applicant in accordance with the relevant provisions of law.
Shobhnath Vs Manmati and Others	SA No. 5 of 2002	04.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava	Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Sec.68, Indian Succession Act, 1925- Sec.63(C)	Execution of WILL cannot be doubted on suspicious circumstances, arising out of figment of imagination against the evidence available on record.
Mayaram and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WP No. 4337 of 2005	11.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava	Constitution of India under Article- 227 Land Revenue Code- Sec 170-B	Dispute under section 170-B of C.G.L.R.C. - Sub-Divisional Officer rejected the same holding that sale was made upon the permission – in appeal, the Collector hold that permission granted was not bonafide and affirmed by Board of Revenue - held – the Collector assumed jurisdiction to review the order for grant of permission- not permissible – the scope of inquiry under section 170-B of the code is limited to find out whether the aboriginal tribe was defrauded of his legitimate right.
Smt. Mantora Bai (Died) Through Legal Heir Smt. Chitrarekha Bai Vs Smt. Ganeshiya Bai and Another	SA No. 130 of 2003	04.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava	Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Sec.68, Indian Succession Act, 1925- Sec.63(C)	One of the witnesses stating that ascriber prepared the WILL deed and was read over to the testator and after arrive at her own satisfaction, she affixed thumb impression – WILL properly proved.
Industrial Development Bank of India Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPC No. 2235 of 2008	11.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava	Constitution of India under Art-226 Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act , 1960- Sec.64, 78(1) , 78(2) & 94	Revisional jurisdiction under the Act can only be invoked by moving an application within a period of 30 days and not beyond that – extension of period of limitation not available – Registrar cannot invoke revisional jurisdiction suo-motu but on an application made before it.
Paluram and Others Vs Bhukha (Dead) Through Lrs. Through Collector Sarguja and Others	SA No. 246 of 2002	04.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava	C.P.C.- Sec. 145	Registered sale-deed – non-execution asserted – Burden to prove would be on the other party to plead and prove non-execution thereof.
Laxman Singh and Others Vs Gajanand and Another	SA No. 481 of 2003	11.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava	C.P.C.- Sec. 145/146 Limitation Act, 1963- Art.64, Sec.14	Period of pendency of proceedings before Revenue Courts including under Section 145/146 of Cr.P.C. cannot be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act while counting period of limitation of the suit instituted for declaration of title.
Vishal Deshlahre and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPC No. 3499 of 2019	30.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri	Chhattisgarh Muncipalities Act, 1961- Sec 29	Formation of the ward under Section 29 of the Act, 1961 is based on the population not on the number of voters.
Shai Transporters Registered Office At-8-B, Industrial Estate, Bhilai Vs Bhilai Steel Plant, Durg	ARBAP No. 10 of 2019	04.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri	Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 – Sec.11(6) Contempt of Court Act-Sec.2	Disparaging statement made in the application to withdraw consent from the on going arbitral proceedings is amount to interference with the administration of justice – suo- motu contempt registered.
Kumar Saurav Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPC No. 2403, 4950, 5407, 5935, 2428, 2570, 2646 and 2755 of 2019	15.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri	Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Constitution of India – Art.226	*Out of 100 questions as much as 41 questions/answers have wrongly been framed - re-examination ordered - carelessness will always have a price.
Ashok Kumar Tiwari Vs Mohit Kumar and Others	WPC No. 1134 of 2019	15.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri	C.G. Bhu Abhilekh Niyamawali- Chapter-3, Sec.2, Rule-34, Chapter -5- rule 4 C.G. Land Revenue Code,1959 sec.129, 121 to 124	*Placement of missing traverse station (Chanda) is to be done as per procedure and order enlisted in the Chhattisgarh Bhu Abhilekh Niyamawali.
Afajal Ali and another Vs Amruddin Ansari (Dead) Through Lrs and others	SA No. 424 of 2005	24.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Transfer of Property Act, 1882- Sec.6(a) Code of Civil Procedure Order 9 Rule 2, Rule 3, Rule 4 Mohammadan Law- Sec.54 Registration Act, 1908 Sec.-17(1)(b), 49	A deed purporting to relinquish or assign the chance of a Mohammedan heir succeeding to an estate is not registrable under Section 17 r/w Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908.
Prabhudayal Kesharwani and Another Vs Late Dhandai Through Lrs. And Another	WP227 No. 736 of 2018	14.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Code of Civil procedure- Order 21 Rule 35 Constitution of India - Article 227	Issue which has already been framed and decided by the trial Court cannot be permitted to be raised again during the execution proceeding and it is impermissible in law.
Smt. Sukhman Vs Subaso and Others	SA No. 332 of 2007	24.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Code of Civil procedure- Sec.96 Limitation Act, 1908 -Article 120	Cause of action does not accrue from the date of mutation for claiming partition.
Hazi Abdul Rahim Khan Vs Mohammad Karim and Others	SA No. 503 of 2006	20.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Chhattisgarh Accomodation Control Act ,1961-Sec.12(1)(a),Sec.23 C.P.C – Sec.100	A licencee of the original tenant is bound by decree of eviction by virtue of Section 23 of the Act, 1961.
Keshavram and Others Vs Kubercharan (Dead) Through Lrs. And Others	SA No. 307 of 2005	18.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Cr.P.C.- Sec.145 Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956- Sec.8(3)	Sale deed executed by natural guardian of minor son is voidable at the instance of minor – after becoming major, the execution of sale deed has not been challenged – sale become absolute.
Kejuram (Died) Through Lrs and Another Vs Gayna Bai and Others	SA No. 65 of 2006	27.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Code of Civil procedure- Order 22 Rule 3 with Sec.151	Decree passed without bringing legal heirs of plaintiff in counter claim, the same would be ineffective decree – proper procedure is to set aside the ineffective decree and remand the case to the trial Court.
Vishnuprasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Another	SA No. 432 of 2004	13.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	M.P. Ceiling on Agriculture Holdings Act,1960- Sec.11, Sec. 46	Draft statement was not objected within 30 days of its publication – Civil Suit under Section 11(5) of the Act, 1960 would not be maintainable and barred by Section 46 of the Act as well.
Viken Gupta @ Munna Vs Jaitun Bai and Others	SA No. 349 of 2006	21.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	M.P./C.G. Accomodation Control Act, 1961 Sec.12(1)(f)	Landlord must be owner of the accommodation which can be said alternative accommodation as required under Section 12 (i)(f) of the Act, 1961 to turn down his prayer for eviction on the ground of bonafide need.
Mohammed Haneef Vs Ramlakhan and Others	SA No. 61 of 2007	05.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	C.P.C.- Sec.96 & 100 Indian Limitation Act, 1963- Article.59 Specific Relief Act,1963-Sec.31	Cancellation of sale deed – period of limitation would start when the facts entitling the plaintiffs to have the instrument cancelled or set aside become known to him as provided under Article 59 of the Limitation Act.
Abhishek Tiwari Vs Union of India and Others	WP(Cr) No. 1030 of 2019	06.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	I.P.C.- Sec. 294, 323, 451 & 506 with 34 Passport Act, 1967- Sec.6(2)(f) Constitution of India -Art. 21	*Renewal of Passport can be done during the pendency of Criminal Case, if the Passport holder obtains permission from the Criminal Court for travel abroad in line with notification dated 25.08.1993 issued by the Central Government.
Kawardha Rajpariwar Sarvajanik Mandir Nyaas and Another Vs Mahant Rambali Das and Another	SA No. 87 of 2006	14.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	C.G. Public Trust Act, 1951-Sec.3, 6, 7 & 32 C.P.C. u/s. 100, Order-6 Rule-17, Order-41 Rule-27, Validation Act,1964-Sec.4,	Order directing any property to be registered as Public Trust cannot be challenged by way of suit in any Court of law.
Smt. Nanbai Rathore Vs Smt. Meena Bai (Dead) Through Lrs. Ganesh Kunwar and Another	SA No. 373 of 2018	14.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	C.G. Civil Services (Pension Rules) Rule – 47(1),(2),(6),(7)(a)(i), (8) & (14)(b)(i) C.G. Civil Services (Conduct Rules) 1965-Rule.22, 22(1)	*Second wife of deceased Employee of Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Limited (CSPGCL) is not entitled for family pension.
Suresh Kumar and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	SA No. 79 of 2009	20.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	M.P. Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950- Sec.54, sec.54(i) & 54(ii) M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1954- Section 47 Specific Relief Act – Sec.34 Transfer of Property Act, 1882- Sec.41	Suit land was not purchased even from the ostensible owner, purchaser can not be termed to be a bonafide purchaser.
Rajnarayan and Others Vs Smt. Paras Bai Baid and Others	SA No. 233 of 2011	24.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal	Chhattisgarh Accomodation Control Act ,1961-Sec.12(1)(a), (c), (e), (h) C.P.C,1908 – Sec.100 Transfer of Property Act, 1882- Sec.109	By virtue of transfer of lease property, the transferee ipso facto acquires “all the rights” of the transferer/lessor.
Mehatru Baddhai @ Mehatru Ram Baddhai Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPS No. 4365 of 2014	20.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy	Civil Services Conduct Rules, 1965 – Rule 221) & (2)	Punishment of removal from service – the delinquent constable entered into a marriage with another woman having first wife being alive – not interfered.
Gorelal Vs South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. And Another	WPS No. 236 of 2011	27.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy	Constitution of India, Article 226	Finding arrived at in Departmental Enquiry can only be interfered with for non- compliance of principles of natural justice and competency of authority passing the impugned order.
Smt. Janki Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPC No. 3703 of 2019	17.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy	Constitution of India, Article 226	Show cause notice calling an explanation from an employee is not assessable under writ jurisdiction.
Fekuram Tandon Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPC No. 3833 of 2019	05.11.2019	Hob’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy	Constitution of India, Article 226	Request for correction of date of birth in Matriculation Certificate by a Public Servant - 20 years of delay – cannot be entertained.
Himanchal Prasad Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others	WPS No. 672 of 2011	08.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy		Green Card holder is entitled for 2 years age relaxation for the post of Siksha Karmi Grade-III.
Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Vs Rakesh Kumar Anant and Others	MAC No. 521 of 2013	17.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Agrawal	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.173	Driving licence was renewed after the date of incident. Insurance Company is directed to pay compensation first and thereafter recover it from the owner and driver.
Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., Raipur Vs Niki Tiwari and Others	MAC No. 223 of 2014	26.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Agrawal	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.173, 166, 149(2)(a)(ii)	Offending vehicle insured with the Insurance Company – Driving licence has been found fake – Tribunal directing “Pay and Recover” against the Insurance Company – Not interfered with.
B. L. Agrawal Vs State Bureau of Investigation of Economic Offences	WPC No. 8 of 2018	21.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Jusice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant	Constitution of India, Article 226 Prevention of Corruption Act – Sec.13(1) E/ Rule 32 Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 Sec.3	Exoneration of the accused in the departmental proceedings by the order of the State Government cannot be made a ground to close the investigation against him.
Steel Authority of India Limited Vs Lalit Agrawal and others	WPCR No. 484 of 2019	22.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Jusice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant	Constitution of India, Article 226/227Teade Marks Act, 1999 – Sec.103, 108 Indian Penal Code- Sec.420, 485 Cr.P.C.- Sec.397 Prevention of Corruption Act- Sec.5(2)	If the offence under the Special Act is not identical to the IPC, charge under both the Acts has to be framed.
Chandra Shekhar Kaushik and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRR No. 1293 of 2019	18.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Jusice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant	CR.P.C, 1973. Sec 161, I.P.C. Sec 306/34	Accused discharged for the commission of offence under Section 306/34 of IPC – Trial Court is directed to consider the evidence as to whether prima facie case is made out under Section 498-A of the IPC.
Manoj Nirmalkar Vs Smt. Bhagwati Bhawani and Others	CRR No. 368 of 2019	11.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Jusice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant	Cr.P.C.- Sec.125	Woman entering into live-in-relationship, is not entitled for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.
Smt. Preeti Chandra Vs Pradeep Kumar Chandra	TPC No. 44 of 2019	07.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	Code of Civil procedure- Sec.24	Conduct of applicant was not proper and was objectionable during the proceedings in the Family Court – The Family Court is not far away from the city of the residence of the applicant – Conveyance is easily available - transfer petition is rejected.
Amit Kumar Agrawal Vs Smt. Garima Agrawal	TPC No. 47 of 2019	07.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	Code of Civil procedure- Sec.24 , Hindu Marriage Act, 1955- Sec. 13 Cr.P.C.- Sec.125	The petition transferred at the instance of husband – he has to bear the travelling expenses of the non-applicant/wife.
Ashok Agrawal and Another Vs Quality Foundry Industries, Raipur	CRMP No. 1423 of 2019	27.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	Cr.P.C. Sec 482 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881- Sec.138 NI Act- Sec.141 Companies Act, 1956 Sec.610, Sec.163	Summons issued under Section 204 Cr.P.C. - No specific averments against the petitioner showing his responsibility for conduct of business of the Company – Further proceedings of complaint case is stayed till further orders.
Smt. Aanchal alias Kuljeet Kaur Ajmani Vs Amit Ajmani	TPC No. 54 of 2019	13.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	C.P.C.- Sec.24 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955- Sec.12 &13, Cr.P.C.- Sec.125	Family Court is not far away from the city of the resident of the applicant – conveyance easily available – no ground made out – transfer petition is rejected.
Smt. Purnima Dewangan Vs Rajendra Kumar Dewangan	TPC No. 77 of 2018	13.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta	C.P.C.- Sec.24 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955- Sec. 13, Cr.P.C.- Sec.125	Non-applicant abused and threatened the applicant wife to give statement in his favour otherwise face dire consequence - Sufficient to transfer the case.
Saroj Ekka Vs State of Chhattisgarh	Criminal Appeal No. 695 of 2014	03.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel	IPC- Sec.304, 325 Cr.P.C.- Sec.313	The only injury was found over the head of the deceased and he died after six months of the incident – conviction under Section 304 Part-I of the IPC altered to Section 325 of the IPC.
Devendra Prasad Thakur and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh	Criminal Appeal No. 154 of 2011	18.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel	I.P.C. Sec 307/34 CR.P.C, 1973. Sec 313	11 days' delay in lodging FIR – prosecution witnesses stated that injury was due to fall of injured – accused acquitted.
Smt. Sonam @ Joyti Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh	Criminal Appeal No. 1062, 962, 980, 1137 and 1045 of 2018	25.11.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel	Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989-Sec.3 (1)( xii) I.P.C.- Sec.109, 506, 365, 343 & 366 Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012- Sec.4	Attendance of the prosecutrix in the attendance register of hostel was for the whole month – Statement that she remained outside with the accused is not believable – Prosecutrix has also not made complaint about sexual intercourse to anyone – Conviction cannot be upheld.
Ashok Bafana and another Vs Jai Bhagwan Sharma and Others	MAC No. 662 of 2013	15.05.2019	Hob’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.163A Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923	Compensation towards the head of future prospect can be granted while passing award under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Suresh Chand Tripathi and others Vs State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh)	CRA No. 2658 of 1997	19.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Sec.7 and 13(2)	Offence committed prior to the coming in force of the Act, 1988 – charges were framed and the accused was tried and convicted under the Act of 1988 – the entire trial stands vitiated.
National Insurance Company Ltd. Raipur Vs Pyarelal and Others	MAC No. 1045 of 2014	14.03.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.173	Deceased was sitting on the mud-guard of the tractor – not proved – Insurance Company has rightly not been exonerated from its liability.
IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. Raipur Vs Smt. Anti Bai and Others	MAC No. 1186 of 2014	14.05.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.166	Deceased was sitting on the tractor as gratuitous passenger – Insurance Company has rightly been exonerated from its liability.
Nikhil Pandey Vs Ritesh Mehto and Others	MAC No. 1175 of 2014	27.03.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988	Injured was pillion rider – contributory negligence cannot be attributed to him.
Vishnudatt alias Vishnu Vs State of Chhattigarh	CRA No. 1001 of 2001	18.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	CR.P.C, 1973. Sec 374(2) I.P.C. Sec 304 (PART-I)	While assaulting on the head of the deceased with wooden stick, the appellant was not having intention to cause such bodily injury resulting into his death – convicted under Section 325 instead of Section 304 Part-I of the IPC.
Bhoolmati Vs Dholuram Bharati and Another	MAC No. 334 of 2013	04.04.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.166	Claimant suffered permanent disability to the extent of 50% - compensation enhanced.
Tilak Chand Vs State of Chhattigarh	CA No. 1090 of 2001	24.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	I.P.C-Sec.354, Cr.P.C.- Sec. 437-A, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prev. of Atrocities) Act, 1989- Sec.3(1) (xi)	Statement of prosecutrix is corroborated by the contents of FIR – conviction under Section 354 of IPC and Section 3(1)(xi) of the Special Act – upheld.
Sanjay @ Tarkeshwar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CA No. 543 of 2003	01.10.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Indian Penal Code Sec.363, 366, 376 & 506(B) Cr.P.C. Sec.437-A	Prosecutrix was not below 18 years of age on the date of incident and was consenting party – conviction cannot be sustained.
Bharat Singh Thakur and Another Vs Santuram Dhiwar and Others	MAC No. 1352 of 2014	05.04.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.166	Deceased was working as service engineer earning Rs.14,500/- p.m. - His income cannot be assessed on the notional basis – compensation suitably enhanced.
The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Bilaspur Vs Sagni Bai and Others	MAC No. 231 of 2014	16.05.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.166	Acquittal in criminal case is not suffice to hold that the vehicle was not driven rash and negligently by the driver.
Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Vs Smt. Muki Sudi and Others	MAC No. 1641 of 2017 and MAC No. 173 of 2018	29.03.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.173 & 166	Occupant of the offending vehicle – covered under the Insurance Policy – Insurance Company to pay compensation.
Surjit Singh Vs Dileshwar Prasad Yadav and Others	MAC No. 97 of 2015	25.04.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988-Sec.166	Injured got 40% permanent disability – 20% functional disability should be counted towards loss of income.
Smt. Bela Sahu (Chaudhari) and others Vs Nalla Bothu Prasad and Others	MAC No. 650 of 2014	24.04.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	Motor Vehicle Act, 1988- Sec.166	Deceased aged about 44 years was a permanent employee of the Bank – 30% future prospects should be counted toward loss of income.
Ramesh @ Pagal Sen Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CA No. 993 of 2002	19.09.2019	Hon’ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya	IPC- Sec.328 Cr.P.C.-Sec.313, 437-A	FSL report not produced – no specific evidence that the accused has administered any poisonous substance to the victim – conviction under Section 328 of IPC cannot be upheld.
Rajesh Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CA No. 725 of 2009	14.11.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Indian Penal Code Sec.306/34, 498-A & 107	Appellant having illicit relation with the wife of his elder brother - Deceased ended his life by hanging due to mental agony – offence under Section 306 IPC not made out – conviction under Section 498-A of IPC upheld.
Damyanti Devta Vs Rupanand Devta	CRR No. 480 of 2005	05.02.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Cr.P.C. -Sec.125	The source of income of husband should be considered while awarding maintenance to the wife.
Ghanshyam and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 1093 of 2002	13.11.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	IPC- Sec.147, 148, 294, 307 and 323/34 Cr.P.C. - Sec.313	Incident took place about 17 years ago – sentence of 5 years RI is reduced to six months.
Prakash Chandra Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRR No. 564 of 2005	19.02.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	M.P. Anusuchit Vastu (Anugyapan tatha Jamakhori Par Nirbandhan) Order, 1991 Essential Commodities Act- Sec.3/7 and 6 (a)	No procedural irregularity and violation of principles of natural justice found – Order of confiscation affirmed by the appellate Court not interfered with.
B.D. Bhoi Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRR No. 514 of 2006	12.12.2018	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act-Sec.3(1) (x) I.P.C.- Sec.294 Cr.P.C.- Sec.193	Special Judge under SC/ST Act, cannot issue warrant of issue without the case being committed to it.
Raju @ Rajnarayan Vs State of Chhattisgarh	Criminal Revision No. 424 of 2009	19.11.2018	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Public Gambling Act- Sec.4-A	Accused was caught red-handed accepting Satta-patti with an amount of Rs.3500/- - rightly convicted under Section 4-A of the Public Gambling Act.
Vijendra Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 497 of 2002	22.10.2018	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Sec.20(b)(i), Sec.50 Cr.P.C.- Sec.313	Malkhana register does not speak about sending of samples to the FSL for chemical examination – The Constable who was entrusted with the samples for chemical examination has not been examined – conviction under Section 20 (b) (I) of the NDPS Act cannot be sustained.
Shantilal Gangwal and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRR No. 357 of 2005	19.02.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	M.P. Anusuchit Vastu Vaypari (Anugyapan tatha Jamakhori Par Nirbandhan) Order, 1991 – Clause 8(1) Essential Commodities Act- Sec. 6 (k)	The applicant failed to produce the bill of sugar purchased by him. Subsequently produced photocopy of the bill was not proved by examining any witness thereof – Order of confiscation of Collector and affirmed by the appellate Court - not interfered with.
Manbai Vs State of Chhattisgah	CRR No. 186 of 2006	04.12.2018	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	I.P.C-Sec.317,	Case of the prosecution has been supported by medical evidence and statement of independent witnesses – conviction under Section 317 of IPC upheld.
Gowkaran Prasad and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh	Criminal Revision No. 372 of 2004	22.10.2018	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	I.P.C-Sec.294, 452,323/34	Incident had took place about 17 years ago – Sentence reduced to the period already undergone.
Pannalal Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRA No. 292 of 2009	15.05.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor	I.P.C-Sec.363, 366, 376/34 Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act- Sec. 3(1) & 3(2)(v)	The accused allured the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage and committed forcible sexual intercourse – conviction upheld.
Sunita Bhardwaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh	CRR No. 1062 of 2019	04.10.2019	Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey	IPC – Sec. 306, Sec.107	No nexus and proximity with the conduct and behaviour of the accused with that of the suicide committed by the deceased – discharge from the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.