HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAQLQ g§ WRIT PETITION (227) No. 1038 OF 2011 PETITIONER Vikas Agrahari, aged about 33 yCars, S/o late Ashok Kumar Agrahari R/o 535—C (wrongly mentioned in impugned order as 35—C), Nehru Nagar, Meerapur, RS. Atarsuiya, District Allahabad (U.P.). 1) Smt. Archana Gupta, aged about 39 years, W/o Vikas Agrahari, D/o late Vishnudutt Gupta, 2) Ku. Prapti, D/o Vikas Agrahari, Minor represented through her natural guardian Smt. Archana Gupta, Respondent No. 1 81, 2 are ,_ resident of Shailcsh Medical Store, Bus—stand Road, NH—78, Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.). t WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF L ‘ INDIA. ‘ VERSUS RESPONDENTS (SB :Hon’ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:~ Shri Ashish Surana, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondents. ORDER (Passed on 21/09/201 1) By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India petitioner has challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 31/12/2010 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh at Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) in criminal revision No. 83/2010 affirming the order dated 16/ 1 1/2010 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baikunthpur. 2. Shri Ashish Surana, Advocate for the petitioners and Shri Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondents are heard. 3. COpy of both the orders impugned perused. 4. As per claim of petitioner, respondents have not filed application in proper form and have not given details required. By order impugned, both the Courts below have held that application filed /;_..’— @M by petitioner specifies necessary ingredients of the application, Court is required to consider and examine substance of application and not proforma or provisions quoted into application, I do not find any substance in this petition. Consequently, petition is dismissed summarily. Sdl- T.P. Sharma Judge 77,