i?EI IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION N0.3303 /2006 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS <\ A<^. .** ^^-"" y< ^ , Hakim Khan son of Rajpal, aged about 55 years, resident of Saket Colony, Katul Board, District Durg [C.G.]. VERSUS 1] State of Chhattisgarh, through- Secrtary, Home Department, D.K.S. ^ Bhavan, Raipur [C.G.]. 2] D.G.P. [Police], Police Headquarter, Raipur [C.G.]. 3] Senior Superintendent of Police, Durg [C.G.j yA] Town Inspector, Police Station- Durg, District Durg [C.G.]. ^ 5] Revenue Inspector, Durg, through - Tahsildar, District Durg [C.G.] ^- 6] N.R. Jaiswal son of Shri K.R. Jaiswal, aged 45 years, resident of Mohan Nagar, Durg [C.G.]. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^^•^ 2ty— v^ K)' /oy- IN THE H1GH COUR'l' OF CHHATriSGAKH LBILASPUR Writ Petition No. _3309 pf 2006 Petationer Haiaiu Miaa, son ot Rajpal, aged about 55 yesu-s, resident of Saket Colony, Katul Board, DisUict Durg (C.U.) Versus Respondents 1. State of Chliatosgarh, fhrough Secretaxy, Hoine Department, D.K.S. Bfaavaa, Raipur (C.U.J 2. D.G.P.(Police), PoUce Headquarter, Kaipur (C.G.) 3. Seiiior Superintendent of Potice, Uui^ (C.G.) 4. Town Inspector, PoUce Station- Durg, District Durg (C.G.) 5. Revenue Inspector, Durg, through Tahsudar, District Diirg (C.G.) 6. N.R.daiswal, son of Shri K.R.iJaiswal, aged 45 years, rcsident of Mohan Nagar, Durg (C.G.) (Writ Petition under Article 226/ 227 ot th.e Constitutlon of India) (SB: Hon'ble Stu-iSatisti K. AgnihotnJ.) Ms Raru Pafhak, Advocate for fhe petitioaer. Sbri Vuiav Harit, Ueputy Advocate Geueral tbr £h.erespondents No. 1 to 5. O RD B R ( Passed on this 31st Day ofJaauaiy, 2009 ) 1. The matter was taken up for hearing on 6.7.201)6, 5.10.2006, 8.11.2006, 16.11.2006 and 24.11.2006. Tbe matter was aU ttie tiiue adjourued on fb.e request of learued coiinsel appeariiig for ttie petitioner. Today also leacued counsel appearmg tbr ttie petitioner prays for time. It appeara that the petittoner is not uiterested iu pursuiag tkie uiatter. 2. Thus, tfae peti.tion is disiaissed tbr waut of prosecution. Consequently, M(W)P No. 2535/2006 is also dismissed, ' Sd/- ; Satish K. Agnihotri Thalmr ' JudgC