Chhattisgarh High Court Judgments & News

Chattisgarh High Court

Supreme Court Stays Conviction of Amit Jogi in Ram Avtar Jaggi Murder Case

The Supreme Court stayed the Chhattisgarh High Court judgment that had convicted and sentenced Amit Jogi, son of former Chief Minister Ajit Jogi, to life imprisonment.

The bench issued notice on Jogi’s appeal against the verdict involving the 2003 murder of NCP leader Ram Avtar Jaggi.

Justice Mehta questioned the High Court's decision to pass a conviction and sentence allegedly without hearing the appellant.

Previously, a trial court had acquitted Jogi in 2007, but the High Court recently reversed that order, terming him the "mastermind" of the conspiracy.

[Amit Jogi v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors.]

Read Details / 6 days ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Chhattisgarh High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Professor Over Alleged Coercion to Offer Namaz

The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to quash an FIR against Professor Dilip Jha, an NSS Project Coordinator accused of coercing non-Muslim students to offer namaz during a camp in Bilaspur.

The Bench observed that with the investigation complete and a charge sheet filed, there is sufficient prima facie evidence for trial.

The case involves allegations that during an Eid-ul-Fitr event, students were pressured to join religious prayers under threat of certificate cancellation.

While Jha claimed he was absent and held no operational role, the Court ruled that such factual disputes must be settled via cross-examination during trial.

[Dilip Jha v. State of Chhattisgarh]

Read Details / 9 days ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Minor’s Voluntary Travel Not Kidnapping Without Inducement, Rules Chhattisgarh High Court in POCSO Case

The Chhattisgarh High Court set aside a 20-year sentence under the POCSO Act, holding that voluntary conduct by a minor cannot automatically amount to kidnapping.

The case involved a 15-year-old who travelled with the accused across multiple cities and stayed with him for nearly a month.

The Court found no evidence of inducement or coercion, emphasizing that “taking” or “enticing” is essential to constitute kidnapping.

It ruled that mere voluntary companionship, without proof of force or deception, fails to meet the legal threshold for conviction.

[Deepak Vaishnav v. State of Chhattisgarh]

Read Details / 16 days ago

S PavithraBookmark

Chhattisgarh HC Holds Voluntary Elopement of Minor Without Inducement Does Not Amount to Kidnapping

The Chhattisgarh High Court held that a minor girl voluntarily eloping with her lover does not amount to kidnapping in the absence of inducement, coercion, or active involvement by the accused.

The Court acquitted a 24-year-old man who had been sentenced under the POCSO Act, noting that there was no evidence to show he persuaded or forced the girl to leave her home.

It observed that the girl had willingly accompanied him and stayed with him without resistance or complaint.

The ruling reiterates that mere voluntary companionship, without proof of enticement, cannot attract criminal liability for kidnapping.

[Deepak Vaishnav v. State of Chhattisgarh]

Read Details / 18 days ago

S PavithraBookmark

No Prior Permission Required for Prayer Meetings Inside Homes: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that no law prevents individuals from holding religious prayer meetings within their private residences.

Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi quashed police notices that had directed residents in Janjgir-Champa to stop organizing Christian prayer meetings in their home.

The Court clarified that as registered owners of the property, the petitioners do not require prior administrative permission for such gatherings, provided they do not violate existing laws.

While the Court protected the petitioners' civil rights against police harassment, but noted that authorities remain empowered to take action if noise pollution or law and order issues arise.

[Badri Prasad Sahu & Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.]

Read Details / 28 days ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Chhattisgarh High Court Denies Bail in ₹540 Crore Coal Levy Case

The Chhattisgarh High Court recently denied bail to Devendra Dadsena, personal assistant to ex-State Congress Treasurer Ramgopal Agrawal, in the ₹540 crore coal levy scam.

Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas held that prima facie evidence showed Dadsena’s involvement in handling and distributing illegal funds for political purposes.

The Court rejected a plea for parity with co-accused, noting Dadsena was arrested only in July 2025, unlike others who spent years in custody.

Emphasizing that economic offences constitute a "class apart," the Bench observed that such deep-rooted conspiracies affect the country’s financial health and demand a rigorous approach toward bail.

[Devendra Dadsena v. State of Chhattisgarh]

Read Details / 29 days ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Supreme Court to Examine if Court Employee Can Pursue LL.B as Regular Student

The Supreme Court issued notice in a plea challenging a Chhattisgarh High Court order that barred a probationary court employee from attending the final year of his LL.B course as a regular student.

The Bench examined whether the Chhattisgarh District Judiciary Establishment Rules, 2023, which prohibit employees from appearing as regular candidates in academic exams, should apply to those who began their studies before the rules were enacted.

While a Single Judge originally allowed the employee's request citing "saving provisions," a Division Bench later set that order aside, ruling that such permission would harm administrative discipline and statutory compliance.

[Ajit Choubelal Gohra v. High Court of Chhattisgarh & Ors]

Read Order / a month ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Criminal Law Cannot be Used to Vent Personal Grievances: Chhattisgarh HC Quashes Complaint Against Judges

The Chhattisgarh High Court quashed a criminal complaint filed against a former Chief Justice, a sitting High Court judge, and several judicial officers, holding that criminal law cannot be used to settle personal grievances.

A bench led by Justice Ramesh Sinha observed that the complaint lacked material particulars and was based merely on suspicion and conjecture.

The complaint had been filed by the wife of a judicial officer alleging a conspiracy to prevent the filing of a chargesheet in a criminal case.

The Court held that the allegations did not disclose any cognizable offence and that allowing such proceedings would amount to misuse of the criminal justice process.

Read Order / a month ago

S PavithraBookmark

Study Leave for Higher Education Not a Matter of Right: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court held that study leave for higher education cannot be claimed as a matter of right by government employees.

The Court dismissed the appeal of a mathematics lecturer from a government polytechnic college whose request for study leave to pursue a PhD had been rejected by the authorities.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru upheld the earlier decision, observing that granting study leave depends on administrative discretion and institutional requirements.

Since the competent authority had validly rejected the request, the Court found no reason to interfere.

[Chitranjan Lal v. State of Chhattisgarh]

Read Judgement / a month ago

S PavithraBookmark

Penalty for Delay in Compensation Must be Paid by Employer, Not Insurance Company: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court ruled that an employer must personally pay the penalty for delaying compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923, even if the compensation amount is covered by insurance.

The Court clarified that the penalty under Section 4A(3)(b) arises from the employer’s own default and cannot be shifted to the insurance company.

The case arose after an employee died in a work-related accident and compensation was not paid within the statutory period.

While the insurer may pay compensation and interest, the Court held that the penalty must be borne by the employer to ensure timely payment and maintain the deterrent purpose of the law.

Read Details / a month ago

S PavithraBookmark

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals in Actress Prathyusha Death Case, Upholds Abetment Conviction

The Supreme Court of India has dismissed appeals in the 23-year-old death case of Telugu/Tamil actress Prathyusha, ruling out allegations of murder and rape.

A Bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan held that consistent eyewitness accounts and medical evidence established death by poisoning. The Court noted that Prathyusha and her boyfriend, Gudipalli Siddhartha Reddy, had consumed poison amid opposition to their relationship, though Reddy survived.

Rejecting the defence of accidental intake, the Court found Reddy guilty of abetment to suicide for procuring the poison and directed him to surrender within four weeks.

It also termed the postmortem conducted by Dr. Muni Swamy unprofessional.

[Gudipalli Siddharta Reddy v. State (C.B.I.)]

Read Details / 2 months ago

VishwaBookmark

Rape Constitutes "Brutal Invasion" of Woman’s Dignity under Article 21: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court refused to set aside a man’s rape conviction, holding that the offence represents a serious assault on a woman’s dignity and a brutal infringement of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The case arose from an appeal against a Sessions Court judgment convicting the accused under Sections 376, 506, 323 and 342 of the IPC.

The Court rejected the defence of consent, relying on the survivor’s consistent testimony, corroborative medical injuries, and the FSL report, and concluded that the prosecution had established the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

Read Details / 2 months ago

Thanush SBookmark

Father Living with Second Wife Without Divorce Not Entitled to Child Custody: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that a father cohabiting with a second woman without obtaining a divorce from his first wife is not entitled to custody of his child.

The Court emphasised that the paramount consideration in custody disputes is the welfare of the child, which outweighs the financial capacity or personal circumstances of the parent.

It noted that the father’s conduct in maintaining a second relationship without legally dissolving the first marriage adversely impacts his moral fitness for custody.

Accordingly, the High Court declined the father’s plea for custody, reinforcing that child welfare is the guiding principle in such matters.

[Laxmikant Joshi v. Lokeshwari @ Parmeshwari & Anr.]

Read Details / 3 months ago

MahiraBookmark

RTI Exemption Applies to Judicial Officers’ Service Records: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that service records of judicial officers, including educational and service certificates, complaints, and details of departmental inquiries, are exempt from disclosure under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

The ruling arose from petitions challenging directions issued by the State Information Commission to disclose such information relating to three judicial officers.

The Court held that the material constituted “personal information” protected under Sections 8(1)(j) and 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act and could not be disclosed in the absence of any overriding public interest.

The Court accordingly quashed the SIC’s directions.

[High Court of Chhattisgarh v. Rajkumar Mishra & Anr.]

Read Details / 3 months ago

Thanush SBookmark

Chhattisgarh High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Former CM Aide in ₹4,000 Crore Liquor Scam

The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to a former aide of the Chief Minister in connection with the alleged ₹4,000 crore liquor scam.

Justice Arvind Kumar Verma held that pre-arrest bail cannot be used to stall or weaken a lawful investigation, especially in serious economic offences involving corruption.

The Court noted that such cases have a wide societal impact and often require custodial interrogation to uncover the larger conspiracy, trace money trails, and collect crucial evidence.

It observed that granting protection at this sensitive stage would interfere with the ongoing probe and therefore declined to extend anticipatory bail.

Read Details / 3 months ago

MananBookmark