BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHAT’NSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT APPEAL NogfM 1.1 APPELLANT/ ‘ PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ’1 OF 2011 DIGIVIJAY DAYAL, S/o Shri DR‘Dayal, aged about 33 years, Asstt‘ Distt. Public Prosecution Officer, Ambikapur District —Surguja[C.G.] 'VERSUs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Through— Principal Socretary Department of Law 8L Legislative Affairs, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur [C.G.] HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH Through— Registrar General) High Court of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur [C.G‘} “k WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2(1) OF CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT (APPEAL TO DIVISION BENCH), ACT, 2006 /<M MFEA CW HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Division Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri & Hon’bie Shri Radhe Shyam Sharma, JJ. WRIT APPEAL NO.391 OF 2011 APPELLANT/ PETITIONER Digivijay Dayal Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Another (Writ Appeal under Section 2 (1) of Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006 Present :- Shri Ashok Swarnkar, Advocate for the appeiiant. / . wen» r I l WA No.3-39 of 201 1.(decided on 18-84‘201 1) Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Dy. Govt. Advocate with Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State. Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal,'Advocate for the respondent No.2. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 23m day of August, 201 1) 1. This intra-Court appeal arises from the order dated 24-6—2011 (Annexure — A/1) passed in W.P. (S) No.3186 of 2011 (Dig/'vijay Dayal v. State of Chhattisgarh & Another) whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein. 2. At the very outset, learned counsel appearingfor the parties jointly and fairly submit that in view of the decision of this Court rendered in Lalit Jangde v. High Court of Chhattisgarh1, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 3. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed in terms of Lalit Jangde \’\ (supra). , r W Sdl- Sdl— SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI " Radhe Shyam Sharma Judge