Jahida v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (Cr.) No.11 of 2016 Jahida, D/o Dukhi Khalifa, aged about 35 years, R/o Haldibadi, Ward No.12, Behind B.S.N.L. Office, Chirimiri, District Koria (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

2. Superintendent of Police, Koria, District Koria (C.G.)

3. Station House Office, Police Station Chirimiri, District Koria (C.G.)

4. Shivendra Rajpoot No. 32, Station House Office, Police Station Chirimiri, District Koria (C.G.)

5. Dilip Dubey, Assistant Sub Inspector, Police Station Chirimiri, District Koria (C.G.)

6. Jitendra Mishra, Constable, Police Station Chirimiri, District Koria (C.G.)

7. Vimal Jaiswal, Constable, Police Station Chirimiri, District Koria (C.G.)

8. Dr. R.R. Gajbhaiye, aged about 63 years, Extension, Community Health Centre, Chirimiri, District Koria (C.G.)

9. Afsar Ali, aged about 40 years,

10. Abdul, aged about 35 years,

11. Chhotu, aged about 27 years,

12. Sujeet, aged about 22 years,

13. Jaikishan, aged about 45 years,

14. Raju Banjara, aged about 43 years, No.9 to 14 are R/o Haldibadi, P. S. Chirimiri, District Koria (C.G.) ---- Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner:

Mr. Sumit Singh Rathore, Advocate.

For Respondents No.1 to 3 / State: - Mr.Ravi Kumar Bhagat, Deputy Govt. Advocate.

For Respondent No.8:

Mr. S.S. Baghel, Advocate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board

18/02/2021

1. This petition is mainly directed for registration of offence for death of the petitioner's daughter.

2. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that after filing of this writ petition on 18-1-2016, FIR against respondent No.8 Dr. R.R. Gajbhyiya has already been registered and he is being prosecuted in which he has been enlarged on bail. As such, no cause of action survives in this writ petition. However, so far as relief against respondents No.5 to 8 is concerned, the petitioner is at liberty to make representation / complaint to the disciplinary authority of respondents No.5 to 8 which shall be considered in accordance with law. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

3. The writ petition is accordingly closed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma