Podiyami Muiye v. State Of Chhattisgarh
-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPHC No. 12 of 2017 Podiyami Muiye W/o Podiyami Panda, Aged About 37 Years Scheduled Tribe Muriya, R/o. Village Chintagufa, P S Chitagufa, Tehsil Konta, District Sukma (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Director General Of Police, Chhattisgarh, Police Headquarters, City Raipur, District 492001 (Chhattisgarh)
2. Superintendent Of Police, Sukma, District Sukma (Chhattisgarh)
3. Additional Superintendent Of Police, Anti Naxal Operation, Sukma, District Sukma (Chhattisgarh)
4. Inspector General Of Police, Bastar Range, District Sukma Chhattisgarh
5. Deputy Inspector General Of Police, Dantewada Range, District Dantewada (Chhattisgarh)
6. Special D G P, Anti- Naxal Operations, Police Headquarters, City Raipur ---- Respondents For Petitioner :
Ms. Sudha Bhardwaj, Advocate For State :
Shri Prafull Bharat, Additional Advocate General Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 22/05/2017 Heard.
1. Pursuant to previous order dated 18.5.2017 passed by this Court, detenue- Podiyami Panda is present before the Court along with Mr. Jitendra Shukla, Addl. S.P. (OPS), Sukma and Mr. Sanjay Rajput, ASI.
-22. On being asked, Shri Podiyami Panda states that he himself has voluntarily appeared before the police on 9.5.2017 and is comfortably living in the police camp. He further states that he is living in the police camp because of safety to his life as there is an apprehension of being killed at the hands of nexallites in the event he goes back to his village. According to the detenue, no sort of pressure is there on him by the police and he is enjoying full liberty to move around.
3. On the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner-wife has been permitted to interact with her husband/detenue in the Court hall itself. Having discussions with his wife-petitioner, detenue Podiyami Panda has reiterated that he is living in the police camp of his own and does not want to go with the petitioner-wife.
4. Thus, in view of aforesaid statement made by the detenue himself, nothing survives in the present petition. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Pritinker Diwaker) (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Vacation Judge Vacation Judge Praveen