Godavari Nishad v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPCR No. 122 of 2019 Godavari Nishad W/o Shri Suresh Nishad Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Patharidih, P.S. Urla, Raipur District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Indrawati Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Atal Nagar New Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Superintendent of Police Raipur , District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Station House Officer Police Station Urla, Raipur District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For the petitioner :

Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate For the Respondents :

Mr. Akash Pandey, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board .02.2019

1. Heard.

2. The present petition is for registering the FIR against G.N. Diaries Limited Chit Fund Company including God (India) Limited and Go Gold Ltd as also its Directors, Core Committee members and others.

3. It is stated that the petitioner has sent a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Raipur and the S.H.O., Police Station, Urla, Distt. Raipur, despite that the FIR has not been registered against the Company and the persons involved.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though different reports were sent but no action has been taken till today instead she was directed to go to lodge the report at Police Station Telibandha, Raipur.

5. Learned State Counsel submits that along with the copy of

the complaint as many as 18 names have been given by the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner herself has admitted the fact that she was one of the agents, who allured the other persons to deposit money in the Company, therefore, she may be one of the accused.

6. A perusal of the complaint shows that the petitioner and her husband have invested the money in the Company and she has also persuaded the other persons to deposit. Therefore, irrespective of the fact the role played by the petitioner, over all perusal of the complaint shows that the cognizable offence is reported, therefore, as per the law laid down in the matter of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others (2014) 2 SCC 1, the Police is obliged to register the FIR and accordingly the Police is directed to lodge the FIR. It is further made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion as to the number of persons who have been named in the FIR, it is for the police to investigate, including the role played by the petitioner herself.

It is expected that the Police shall proceed with the enquiry after registration of the FIR against the erring persons and the persons who were in hold of affairs of the Company. It is further made clear that the Police Officer while registering the FIR shall not be swayed away by the versions of the persons named in the FIR, as it is according to the petitioner itself and the Court has not expressed any opinion on the same.

7. With such observation, this petition stands disposed of. Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o