DWARKA DAS BHOOTDA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — CRMP/1489/2026
Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 02nd June 2026.
CNR: CGHC010212062026
Filing Number
CRMP/8988/2026
Filing Date
25-May-2026
Registration No
CRMP/1489/2026
Registration Date
29-May-2026
Judge
Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Coram
Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )
Sub-Category
MATTERS RELATING TO QUASHING OF FIR / CHALLAN ( 1446 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
02-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Last updated 04-Jun-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.DWARKA DAS BHOOTDA
Adv. RATNESH KUMAR AGRAWAL,ANURADHA AGRAWAL,ANURADHA AGRAWAL, ,ANURADHA AGRAWAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
02-Jun-2026
Hon'ble The Chief Justice,Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta GuruView PDF
Case Summary: CRMP/1489/2026 The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed 83-year-old retired officer Dwarka Das Bhootda's petition seeking to quash a 1995 Prevention of Corruption Act FIR and subsequent proceedings alleging accumulation of disproportionate assets (Rs. 43,38,887/-). The court rejected his argument that the 30-year delay made prosecution futile, finding grave financial allegations supported by prima facie evidence including assets purchased in family members' names. The court upheld the trial court's cognizance order and charge framing, directing trial completion within six months without unnecessary adjournments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
02-Jun-2026
Fresh Matters
Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
-
25-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CRMP/1489/2026
Case Summary: CRMP/1489/2026 The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed 83-year-old retired officer Dwarka Das Bhootda's petition seeking to quash a 1995 Prevention of Corruption Act FIR and subsequent proceedings alleging accumulation of disproportionate assets (Rs. 43,38,887/-). The court rejected his argument that the 30-year delay made prosecution futile, finding grave financial allegations supported by prima facie evidence including assets purchased in family members' names. The court upheld the trial court's cognizance order and charge framing, directing trial completion within six months without unnecessary adjournments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts