Sadhuram Kashyap v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPCR No. 493 of 2017 Sadhuram Kashyap S/o Chamruram Kashyap Aged About 29 Years Caste Gond R/o Village Taraibeda Police Station Kondagaon Tahsil And District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh. , Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary Department of Home Affairs Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. , Chhattisgarh

2. Director General of Police , Police Head Quarters Naya Raipur Distict Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Inspector General of Police Police Range Bastar Jagdalpur , District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

4. Collector, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh

5. Superintendent of Police , Kondagaon District Kondagaon , District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh

6. Station House Officer , Police Station Kondagaon District Kondagaon , District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For the applicant :

Mr. Kishore Narain, Advocate.

For the Respondent :

Mr. Ashish Shukla, Dy.A.G., Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board .07.2018

1. This writ petition is filed with a grievance that despite lodging of cognizable reports, the FIR has not been registered.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 16.04.2017 while the applicants and others were performing prayers, they were attacked and manhandled by some persons and on the very next day also i.e., 17.04.2017 threatenings were extended to them by the same persons, for which two reports were made, one to the Superintendent

of Police, Kondagaon and the other to District Magistrate, Kondagaon but no action was taken. Therefore, the police be directed to register the FIR and conduct the investigation.

3. The reply/documents filed by the State would reveal that FIR has been registered pursuant to the report made by the complainant and Crime No.6/208 was registered for the offences punishable u/ss 294, 323, 34 of IPC.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the registration of FIR, neither any action is taken nor investigation is in progress.

5. In the matter of Ram Lal Narang v. State (Delhi Administration) (1979) 2 SCC 322, the Supreme Court held that whenever an Officer Incharge of the Police received information relating to commission of a cognizable offence, he was required to register the FIR and complete the investigation without unnecessary delay and, as soon as it was completed, to forward to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence upon a police report, a report in the prescribed form, setting forth the names of the parties, the nature of the information and the names of the persons who appeared to be acquainted with the circumstances of the case.

6. Considering the above law laid down by the Supreme Court, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned Police Station to complete the investigation in accordance with law laid down by the Supreme Court in Ram Lal Narang (supra) at the earliest and file and final report/Khatma or charge sheet, as the case may be, before the competent Criminal Court. Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o