Surendra Rai v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP(CR) No. 144 of 2018 Surendra Rai, S/o. Late Shri C.L. Rai, Aged About 50 Years, R/o. Block No. 4, Quarter No. A, Street, No. 20, Sector-7, Police Station Bhilai, Nagar, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Inspector General Of Police, Durg Range, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

4. Superintendent Of Police, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

5. Shri Shashi Mohan Singh, S/o Shri Kishan Dev Singh, Additional Superintendent Of Police, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

6. Station House Officer, Police Station Bhilai Nagar, Sector-6, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

7. Purana Bahadur, A.S.I.

8. Santosh Sharma Constable,

9. O.P. Singh, Driver Respondent No.7 to 9 are Posted at Police Station Sector-6, Bhilai Nagar, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :

Dr. Kumaresh Tiwari, Advocate For State :

Mr. Ashish Shukla, Dy. A.G.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 06.03.2018 Heard 1.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that on 24.12.2017 at the direction of Shashi Mohan Singh, Additional S.P., Durg, S.I. Purna Bahadur along with other police persons without any reason entered forcefully into the house of the petitioner and thereafter took him away and was made to stand in Chamber of Town Inspector of Sector-6, Police Station. It was further alleged that he was force to produce his son Manish Yadav and certain blank

documents were got signed, however, no case was registered against him. Therefore, after he was released from the custody, certain representations were made to the higher police officer, however, the same is unheard till date. Therefore, it is prayed that the representation may be decided forthwith.

2.

Perused the documents. The document shows that one representation is also made to the S.P. Durg on 02.01.2018. Considering the documents and the nature of allegation, it is directed that the S.P. Durg shall decide the representation made by the petitioner within a further period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case the representation dated 02.01.2018 is not on the record, the petitioner shall be entitled to give another representation along-with a copy of this order. 3.

With such observation, the petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Ashok