National emblem

High Court Of Chhattisgarh

Latest 10 AFR Judgements with Case Note

1
AMIT KUMAR BHARADWAJ VS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Judge : Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:36963]
Case Note : Bright future of untainted candidates cannot be held in abeyance merely due to allegations against authorities - merit based appointment must be safeguarded by law. The mere presence of allegations to doubts concerning certain authorities involved in the recruitment process cannot, as a matter of law, serve as a valid reason to deny appointment to meritorious and unblemished candidates, as candidates have invested signifcant time and effort their preparation and have been duly selected for the highest positions through a rigorous and transparent recuitment process.
Case No : WPS/2311/2024
Date of Judgement : 29.07.2025
2
MR. SOURABH VS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT,
Judge : Hon'ble The Chief Justice Shri Ramesh Sinha, Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:35298-DB]
Case Note : In a money laundering case, as the modus operandi often involves circuitous and opaque financial transactions which make direct evidence inherently difficult to obtain, the absence of verifiable legitimate income can lead the court to hold that there exists a nexus between the property sought to be attached and the proceeds of crime.
Case No : MA/34/2025
Date of Judgement : 23.07.2025
3
AMARDAS MAHANT VS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Judge : Hon'ble The Chief Justice Shri Ramesh Sinha, Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:33976-DB]
Case Note : In absence of any evidence suggesting that the person kidnapped was taken or detained for the purpose of making a ransom demand or for coercing any person to act in a particular manner, the essential ingredients of section 364 A IPC are not satisfied. Mere kidnapping and concealment without a ransom demand do not attract section 364 A IPC
Case No : CRA/1790/2024
Date of Judgement : 18.07.2025
4
Hunnaid Hussain VS State of M.P.
Judge : Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:32346]
Case Note : it is statutory obligation to not interfere at the initial stage for framing the charges merely on hypothesis imagination and far fetched reasons which in law amount to interdicting the trial against the accused persons.l
Case No : CRR/388/1997
Date of Judgement : 11.07.2025
5
AJAY VERMA @ CHHOTU VS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Judge : Hon'ble The Chief Justice Shri Ramesh Sinha, Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:31864-DB]
Case Note : Were a Victim is raped by one more persons forming a group or acting in furtherance of a common intention , each member of such group shall be deemed ton have a committed the offence of rape, in accordance with the principles of joint liability and common intention as defined under the applicable laws.
Case No : CRA/390/2021
Date of Judgement : 10.07.2025
6
CHANDRAKANT MAHILANGE VS SMT. NAGESHWARI GAHNE
Judge : Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:31217]
Case Note : Privacy is a Constitutionally protected right that primarily arises from the guarantee of life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India It encompasses the preservation of personal intimacies, the sanctity of family life,marriage, procreation the home and sexual orientation.Any intrusion into this right would amount to a violation of the fundamental right of the individual.
Case No : WP227/612/2025
Date of Judgement : 08.07.2025
7
ARVIND KUMAR VS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Judge : Hon'ble The Chief Justice Shri Ramesh Sinha, Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:30088-DB]
Case Note : Any eligibility criteria must bear a reasonable corelation with the with the functional recruitment of the post, the nature of the duties to be performed and the aptitudes necessary to fulfill those duties effectively.
Case No : WPS/1983/2025
Date of Judgement : 03.07.2025
8
Shri Vindhyavasini Maa Bilaimata Pujari Parishad Committee VS Vindhyavasini Mandir Trust Samiti
Judge : Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:29861]
Case Note : The pujari is only a grantee to manage the property of the deity and such grant can be reassumed if the pujari fails to do the task assigned to him i.e. to offer prayers. He cannot be thus treated as a Bhumiswami.
Case No : WP227/58/2016
Date of Judgement : 02.07.2025
9
CHANDRAKANT NISHAD VS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Judge : Hon'ble The Chief Justice Shri Ramesh Sinha, Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:29304-DB]
Case Note : If the chain of circumstances is complete and the recoveries made from the accused are duly proved, and if accused was last seen together with the deceased shortly before the death, then the failure of the accused to offer a plausible explanation would be fatal to his defence.
Case No : CRA/699/2023
Date of Judgement : 01.07.2025
10
PADAM KUMAR SINGHANIA VS SOUTH EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD.
Judge : Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Neutral Citation : [2025:CGHC:29336]
Case Note : When there is no direction with regard to appropriation of decretal amount either in decree or award, adjustment shall be made firstly towards payment of interest and cast thereafter towards payment of the principal amount.
Case No : WP227/940/2018
Date of Judgement : 01.07.2025