High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPCR/277/2015disposed off

Vardhman Chopra v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-04-12Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP (Cr.) No.277 of 2015 Vardhaman Chopra, S/o Shri Santosh Chopra, aged about 33 years, R/o Gole Baaar, Mungeli, at present residing at near Radhakrishna Mandir, Nayapara, Police Station - Gole Bazar, Raipur (CG) --- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Home, Naya Raipur, Mantralaya, Tahsil & District Raipur (CG)

2. Superintendent of Police, Raipur, Tahsil & District-Raipur (CG)

3. Superintendent of Police, Mungeli, Tahsil & District-Mungeli (CG)

4. Station House Officer, Police Station-Tikrapara, Raipur, Tahsil & District Raipur (CG)

5. Station House Officer, Police Station-City Kotwali, Mungeli, Tahsil & District-Mungeli (CG) --- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr.Aditya Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents :

Mr.Ravi Kumar Bhagat, Dy.G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 12/04/2019

1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks appropriate direction to command the respondents to investigate the matter properly as he has already filed complaint on 19.11.2010 and FIR has been registered against director of Vinayak Vihar.

2. Learned State Counsel submits that offence was registered against director of Vinayak Vihar and after investigation no offence is found to have been committed by them and therefore, closure report has been filed before the jurisdictional criminal Court on 31.12.2011.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the writ petition.

4. Since no offence is found to have been committed by director of Vinayak Vihar and closure report has been filed before the

jurisdictional criminal Court on 31.12.2011, the petitioner is at liberty to appear before the jurisdictional criminal Court and make submission that there is sufficient material against concerned person for taking cognizance or to file complaint under Sections 156(3) or 190/200 of the CrPC.

5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition finally stands disposed of.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge B/-