HARISHANKAR PATEL vs SMT. BINDIYA PATEL Advocate - Atanu Ghosh, ,PRIYANKA RAI — CRR/498/2026

Next hearing: 15th June 2026.

Next hearing 15-Jun-2026

CNR: CGHC010138102026

Filing Number

CRR/5824/2026

Filing Date

06-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRR/498/2026

Registration Date

10-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

MATTERS RELATING TO PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005 ( 1444 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Last updated 26-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.HARISHANKAR PATEL

    Adv. RATNESH KUMAR AGRAWAL,SOURAV AGRAWAL,SOURAV AGRAWAL, ,sanjay Kumar Gupta,ANURADHA AGRAWAL,SOURAV AGRAWAL

  2. 2.Antram Patel

  3. 3.Smt. Jalkunwar

  4. 4.Sanjay Patel

  5. 5.Smt. Padma Patel

  6. 6.Nirmal Patel

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SMT. BINDIYA PATEL Advocate - Atanu Ghosh, ,PRIYANKA RAI

Case History

  1. 15-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 15-Jun-2026

    For Orders [On Office Notes]

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar JaiswalView PDF

    The High Court of Chhattisgarh overruled the Registry's default objection regarding the Vakalatnama (power of attorney) not being signed by Applicant No. 1, accepting that the father signed as guardian due to the applicant's unsound mind. The court issued notice to the respondent, directed payment of court fees within 7 days, and adjourned the case to June 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 16-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 06-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRR/498/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Chhattisgarh overruled the Registry's default objection regarding the Vakalatnama (power of attorney) not being signed by Applicant No. 1, accepting that the father signed as guardian due to the applicant's unsound mind. The court issued notice to the respondent, directed payment of court fees within 7 days, and adjourned the case to June 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case