Disposed

Prafull Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC2 Dec 2015WPCR/185/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed seeking direction to register an FIR against accused for offences under IPC sections 120-B, 383, 384, 385, 503, and 504. Court disposed of petition directing police to register FIR and complete investigation in accordance with law following Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the concerned police to register FIR and complete the investigation in accordance with law.

Prafull Patel Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Chhattisgarh HC (2015)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

WPCR No. 185 of 2014

¶4

Prafull Patel S/o Janardan Prasad Patel Aged About 39 Years R/o Vill Odari, Po Bartikala, Ps Chalgali, Dist Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Cg

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home Ministry, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur, Po Rakhi, Dist Raipur, Cg

¶8

The Director General Of Police Police Headquarter, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Dist Raipur, Cg

¶9

The Inspector General Of Police Surguja Range, Dist Surguja, Cg

¶10

The Superintendent Of Police Balrampur, Dist BalrampurRamanujganj, Cg

¶11

The Additional Superintendent Of Police Balrampur, Dist BalrampurRamanujganj, Cg

¶12

The Station House Officer, Ps Chalgali, Distt BalrampurRamanujganj, Cg

¶13

Ramvilas Prajapati S/o Jairam Prajapati

¶14

Madhav Govind Patel S/o Rajendra Prasad Patel

¶15

Omprakash Patel S/o Rambadan Patel

¶16

Balchand Gond S/o Lalsai

¶17

Respondents No. 7 to 10 are r/o Vill Odari, Po Bartikala, Ps Chalgali, Distt Balrampur- Ramanujganj, CG

¶18

---- Respondent

¶19

For Petitioner For Respondent/State For Respondent No.7 to 10

¶20

Shri V.K. Pandey, Advocate Shri Adiraj Surana, Dy. Govt. Advocate Shri S.K. Dewangan, Advocate

¶21

Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra

¶22

Order On Board

¶23

02/12/2015

¶24

Petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to register the FIR against the respondents No.7 to 10 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 383, 384, 385, 503 & 504 of the IPC.

¶25

In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Ram Lal Narang v. State (Delhi Admn.)¹ and Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and Others² , wherein it has been held that in such complaints/FIR disclosing commission of cognizable offence, the concerned police shall register the FIR, complete the investigation within a reasonable time, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned police to proceed in accordance with law and do the needful for completing the investigation at the earliest.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Judge

¶28

Prashant Kumar Mishra

¶29

Gowri

¶30

2 (2014) 2 SCC 1

¶31

1 AIR 1979 SC 1791

Prafull Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prafull Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Jain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Piyush Tiwari Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Piyush Tiwari Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Smt. Krishna Vijayvergiya, Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Tula Ram Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

M/s Walraj Service Centre Vs State Of Chhattisgarh