High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPCR/200/2018disposed off

Virendra Kumar Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-04-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPCR No. 200 of 2018 • Virendra Kumar Verma S/o Shri Balaram Verma, Aged About 36 Years R/o Vill. Tulsi, Post Office Neora And Tahsil Tilda, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat Avm Gramin Vikas Vibhag, Mantralaya Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Home Department Naya Raipur Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Superintendent of Police, Rajya Aarthik Apradh Anveshan Bureau Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. Superintendent of Police Raipur Chhattisgarh

5. Inspector General of Police Raipur Chhattisgarh

6. Collector Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

7. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

8. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Tilda District Raipur Chhattisgarh

9. Smt. Santoshi Verma W/o Manharan Verma Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Tulsi Police Station Neora Tahsil Tilda District Raipur Chhattisgarh 10.Manharan Nayak S/o Dashru Nayak Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Sontara Janpad Panchayat Tilda Tahsil Tilda District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Anand Mohan Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents-State :

Shri Adhiraj Surana, Dy. GA for the State Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 13/04/2018

1. Heard.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by an order of this Court in WPC No.2387/2017 dated 31.08.2017 the Court has directed for an enquiry for embezzlement of fund in the ODF scheme. Consequently, the enquiry was committed by the Collector, Raipur and on enquiry it was found that embezzlement of fund has been made. Thereafter, the report was made to respondent No.3 Superintendent of Police, Rajya Aarthik Apradh Anveshan Bureau Raipur, C.G., however, the FIR has not yet been registered and no investigation is carried out.

3. Perused the report as also the enquiry report. Prima facie it appears that the cognizable offence has been reported by the petitioner. In a result, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others {(2014) 2 SCC 1} it is directed that the concerned police authority shall register the FIR and shall proceed in accordance with law.

4. With such observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu