Lekhraj Khatkar Petitioner In Person v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(CR) No. 441 of 2018 Lekhraj Khatkar, S/o. Shri V. L. Khatkar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o. Vishram Nagar, Jhabar, Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Home Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director General Of Police, Head Quarter Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Inspector General Of Police, District Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Superintendent Of Police, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

5. Station House Officer, Police Station Dipka, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

6. G.V.N. Sharma, R/o. B- Type Urja Nagar, Behind D.A.V. Public School, Gerva Project, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

7. Avinash Shukla, R/o. C-42, Opposite Shiv Mandir, Gevra Project, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

8. Rakesh Saha, S/o. Shri Vishnu, Aged About 32 Years, R/o. M.Q. 419 A, Azad Chowk Dipka Colony, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Petitioner in Person :

Mr. Lekhraj Khatkar --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 09.08.2018 Heard 1.

Petitioner in person submits that he was allured for employment in the SECL as certain lands were acquired and in lieu thereof to provide him job in SECL in different point of time, total amount of Rs.7 Lakhs were paid to certain employees of SECL. It is further contended that thereafter the employment to the petitioner was not provided and eventually when the money was asked back, they refused to return the amount. It is stated that lastly a complaint was made before the police, however, no FIR has been registered and investigation is not being carried out.

2.

Perused the report lodged to the S.H.O. Dipka. The report prima facie shows that cognizable offence has been reported. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in case of Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and Others (2014) 2 SCC 1, it is directed that the police shall forthwith register the FIR and shall complete the investigation according to law. It is further made clear that this Court has not passed any opinion on merits and it is expected that the police shall carry out the investigation impartially to find out the truth. 3.

With such observation, the petition stands disposed of. Ashok Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge