← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPCR/488/2021disposed off

Shashibhushan (S.B.) Pandey, Advocate, v. State Of Chhattisgarh,

2021-07-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPCR No. 488 of 2021 Shashibhushan (S.B.) Pandey, Advocate, S/o Shri Radheshyam Pandey, aged about 45 years, R/o Jorapara, Sarkanda, Police Station: Sakanda, Tahsil & District: Bilaspur (C.G.).

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Home Department Mantralaya, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District: Raipur (C.G.).

2.

Inspector General of Police Bilaspur Range, Bilaspur (C.G.) 3.

Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, District: Bilaspur (C.G.). 4.

Shri Jai Prakash Gupta, Posted as Station Houlse Officer, Police Station: Sarkanda, District: Bilaspur (C.G.). 5.

Laxminarayan Keshar S/o Mucharu @ Sukharu Keshar, aged about 55 years, R/o Village Nagoi, Police Station: Sarkanda, Tahsil & District- Bilaspur (C.G.).

---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. S. B. Pandey, Advocate.

For State : Mr. Devendra Pratap Singh, Dy. A. G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order On Board 30.07.2021

1. The Instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner against the respondent No. 4- Station House Officer, Police Station Sarkanda to not pressurize him for compromise with the accused person and to provide a fair investigation.

2.

Mr. Devendra Pratap Singh, Dy. A. G. and Mr. Satya Narayan Dewangan, Investigating Officer would submit that the final report/chrge-sheet will be filed by tomorrow before the concerning Court.

3.

The accused person has already been granted bail by the trial Court and the offence registered against him are bailable offence. Therefore, the very purpose of filling of the petition is achieved.

4.

At this juncture, the petitioner does not want to prosecute the petition. However, it is observed that if the petitioner have still any grievances, he may approach before this Court by filing of another writ petition.

5.

With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Amita