Deep Chakraborti Vs State of Chhattisgarh

2025:CGHC:6768-DB

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPCR No. 65 of 2025

1 - Deep Chakraborti S/o Shri Dinesh Chakraborti Aged About 36 Years R/o E- 365/366, Rama Green City, Phase-2, Khamtarai Road, Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶5

2 - Jayant Chakraborti S/o Shri Dinesh Chakraborti Aged About 34 Years R/o E- 365/366, Rama Green City, Phase-2, Khamtarai Road, Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶6

... Petitioner(s)

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Ministry Of Home, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

2 - Director General Of Police Police Head Quarters, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

3 - Inspector General Bilaspur, Range Bilaspur, (C.G.)

¶11

4 - Superintendent Of Police Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶12

5 - Top Singh Navrang, Station House Officer, Police Station - Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶13

6 - Ravindra Sharma, S/o J. L. Sharma Aged About 45 Years R/o D-362, Rama Green City, Police Station - Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶14

7 - J. L. Sharma, Aged About- 63 Years, R/o D-362, Rama Green City, Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶15

8 - Tikesh Dewangan, S/o Shankar Lal Dewangan Aged About 22 Years R/o Bhojpur Champa, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ...Respondents

¶16

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶17

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Petitioners : Shri Rajeev Kumar Dubey, and Ms Maya Chaturvijani, Advocates For Respondent/State : Shri Shashank Thakur, Dy AG ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶18

Wpcr 65 of 2025

¶19

2

¶20

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board

¶21

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 06.02.2025

¶22

Heard Shri Rajeev Kumar Dubey, and Ms Maya Chaturvijani, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Shri Shashank Thakur, learned Dy AG, appearing for the respondents/State.

¶23

Petitioners have filed the present petition for grant of following reliefs:

¶24

“10.1)That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the FIR bearing Crime No.691/2024 (Annexure P-1) registered by the respondent No.5/Station House officer, Police StationSarkanda, District-Bilaspur (CG) against the petitioners.

¶25

10.2)That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the case No.469/2024 (Annexure P-2) dated 26.06.2024 pending before the learned City Magistrate, Bilaspur, DistrictBilaspur(CG).

¶26

10.3)That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 & 4 to take action against the respondent No.5 who has registered a false and fabricated case against the petitioners and also took preventive action, handcuffed the petitioners and presented before the learned City Magistrate, Bilaspur, District-Bilaspur (CG).

¶27

10.4)That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to provide the CCTV camera footage of dated 26.06.2024 from 10.00 AM to 5.00 PM.

¶28

Wpcr 65 of 2025

¶29

3

¶30

10.5)That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deems fit and appropriate.”

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that earlier, the petitioners had filed WPCR-340 of 2024, claiming the same relief, which is claimed in the present petition. Said petition came up for hearing before this Court on 06.09.2024, and it was disposed of on the submission made by learned counsel for the State that the Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur Range, Bilaspur (for short, ‘IG of Bilaspur’), vide its communication dated 08.08.2024, has directed the Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur (for short, ‘SP of Bilaspur’), to submit a supplementary report after including the CCTV footage of the Police Station, Sarkanda, and the IG has found that in the report submitted by the SP, CCTV footage was not included.

¶32

As liberty was also granted to the petitioners to raise their grievance in the order dated 06.09.2024 passed in WPCR-340 of 2024, on 20.09.2024, petitioners submitted their representation before the IG, and raised their grievance, but till date, petitioners’ grievance was not settled, therefore, they filed present petition for the aforesaid reliefs.

¶33

This Court vide order dated 31.01.2025 passed the following order:

¶34

“This is the second round of litigation. The learned State counsel prays for one week time to seek instructions in the matter as to what steps have been taken by the Inspector General of Police in pursuance of the

¶35

Wpcr 65 of 2025

¶36

4

¶37

recommendation made by the Superintendent of Police vide letter dated 08.08.2024.”

¶38

On the recommendation made by Inspector General of Police, to the Superintendent of Police, the charge-sheet was issued against the erring Officer i.e. respondent-5, and the Departmental Enquiry is pending against him. The Additional SP, Bilaspur is conducting the enquiry against respondent-5, and the same is going to be concluded very shortly. So far as the FIR registered against the petitioners is concerned, the Sub-Inspector, PS-Sarkanda, Bilaspur, namely, Vyas Narayan Banafar is investigating the case. Though the petitioners are called by the Police repeatedly, they are not appearing in the investigation, and not cooperating with the same. He would further submit that the petitioners are wanted in another criminal case No.2100 of 2019 Crime No.265 of 2019, which is pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, and in that case also, petitioners are not appearing.

¶39

Be that as it may, since the investigation of FIR bearing Crime No.0691 of 2024 registered on 26.06.2024 at 10.20 hours at PSSarkanda, District-Bilaspur against the present petitioners is still pending since then, the Investigation Officer of the present case is directed to conclude the same, and submit Police report before the court concerned, in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today.

¶40

The result of the DE which has been conducted by the Additional SP, Bilaspur shall communicate to the Inspector General of Police,

¶41

Wpcr 65 of 2025

¶42

5

¶43

Bilaspur Range, Bilaspur, as soon as the same is concluded, and he in turn, inform the Registrar General of this Court, which shall be placed before us, in chamber.

¶44

With the aforesaid directions and observations, present petition stands disposed of.

¶45

Sd/Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶46

padma

Deep Chakraborti v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deep Chakraborti v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jeenat Meman Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Aneg Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yamuna Yadav and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Anoter

Smt. Sunita Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Khunte Vs State of Chhattisgarh