Sunil Agrawal v. State Of Chhattisgarh
-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPCR No. 490 of 2019 • Sunil Agrawal S/o Late Shri L.N. Agrawal, Aged About 68 Years, R/o 1/45, Motilal Nehru Nagar (East Bhilai) Police Station - Supela, District - Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - Secretary, Home Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Police Station - New Raipur, Tahsil - Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Inspector General of Police, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District - Durg, Chhattisgarh
3. Superintendent of Police, Durg, District - Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
4. Station House Officer - Police Station - Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
5. Anil Agrawal S/o Late Shri L. N. Agrawal, Aged About 72 Years, R/o 601602, Sangeet Sarita Apartment, Bhula Bhai Desai Road, Opposite Breach Candy Hospital, Mumbai Maharastra., District : Mumbai, Maharashtra
6. Yadvinder Singh Dulal S/o Shri Sarabjit Singh, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Opposite Durg ITI, Shahid Veer Narayan Singh, GE Road, Post - Khursipar, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
7. Pooja Dulal W/o Yadvinder Singh Dulal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Opposite Durg ITI, Shahid Veer Narayan Singh, GE Road, Post - Khursipar, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
8. Mrs. Tankranti W/o I. A. Dhas, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Opposite Durg ITI, Shahid Veer Narayan Singh, GE Road, Post - Khursipar, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
9. G. W. D'souza, Advocate & Notary, Kalpak Estate, Building No. B-11, Shop No. 40, Antop Hill, Mumbai Maharashtra., District : Mumbai, Maharashtra 10.A. S. Sivan Pillai R/o 36-40, Mahalaxmi Bridge Arcade, Near Mahalaxmi Railway Station, Mumbai Maharastra., District : Mumbai, Maharashtra
11. Nimish Kothari R/o Fort Chambers, Harnam Street Fort, Mumbai Maharashtra., District : Mumbai, Maharashtra ---- Respondents For Petitioner - Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate. For State - Shri Neeraj Pradhan, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 02-09-2019 Heard.
-21.
Instant petition has been brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of appropriate writ(s)/direction(s)/order(s) etc. 2.
It is submitted that the petitioner had lodged the FIR against the private respondents on 31-10-2013. Subsequent to which he has given various reminders to the investigating agency, respondents 3 and 4 to investigated the case and file final report. But till now there is no progress report communicated to the petitioner, therefore, it is prayed that specific direction be issued to respondents 3 and 4 to complete the investigation and file charge sheet. 3.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the petition. 4.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5.
On perusal of the copy of the FIR filed along with the petition, it is very much apparent that the FIR has been lodged way back in the year 2013, therefore, there can be no excuse on the part of the respondent No.3 and 4 for not completing the investigation after passing of so many years. Hence, the petition is disposed off with direction. Respondent No.3 and 4 are directed to complete the investigation and file final report within a period of three months from the date of this order.
6.
The petition is disposed off.
Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Aadil