MITHUN BANERJEE vs UNION OF INDIA

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPCR No.299 of 2023 Mithun Banerjee S/o R.

K.

Banerjee Aged About 37 Years R/o C-3 Ground Floor, Anmol Flat, Avanti Vihar, Police Station Khamhardih, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Petitioner Versus 1.

Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of External Affairs, E-Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi 2.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3.

Regional Passport Officer, 1st Floor, Commercial Complex, Sector-4, D.D.

Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4.

Superintendent of Police, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 5.

Station House Officer, Police Station Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 6.

Archana Jha D/o Virendra Jha Aged About 30 Years R/o Gali No.1, Shanti Nagar Ward No.10, Near Chikhli School, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner Mr.

Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Advocate For Respondent-State Mr.

Gurudev I.

Sharan, GA For Respondent-UOI Mr.

R.

Mishra, DSG Hon'ble Mr.

Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Smt.

Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 13 .07.2023 Heard Mr.

Rajeev Kumar Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.

Sharan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State and Mr.

Mishra, learned Dy.

Solicitor General appearing for the respondent-UOI.

1.

By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s): “10.1) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the police authority ensure that the respondent No.6 cannot abscond to abroad and also direct to seize the passport of the respondent No.6.

10.2) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to impound or revoke the passport of respondent No.6.

10.3) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deem fit and appropriate. propriate.” 2.

After arguing at length, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he does not want to press this petition.

3.

In view of the same, the petition is dismissed as not pressed without any further liberty, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the remedy before the appropriate forum.

Sd/- Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Nirala