Jharkhand Council for Democratic Right through Its General Secretary Manob Chowdhury Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Neutral Citation No. 2025:JHHC:37649-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P. (PIL) No. 1258 of 2015

Jharkhand Council for Democratic Right through its General Secretary Manob Chowdhury, Son of Late Mohan Chowdhury, Resident of 2240/B13 Xavier Nagar, Dela Toli, Kokar, P.O. & P.S.- Kokar, District- Ranchi.

¶5

... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand.

¶8

The Chief Secretary, The Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O.Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District-Ranchi.

¶9

The Home Secretary, The Govt. of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, District Ranchi

¶10

The Director General of Police, State of Jharkhand, Police House, P.O.Dhurwa, P.S.- Jagannathpur, District Ranchi.

¶11

The Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand at Ranchi, Police House, P.O.-Dhurwa, P.S.- Jagannathpur, District Ranchi.

¶12

The Union of India.

¶13

The Secretary, The Department of Personnel and Training Administrative Reforms Department, Govt. of India, North Block, New Delhi, Boat Club, P. O. & P.S. Boat Club, New Delhi.

¶14

The Secretary, The Ministry of Home affairs Govt. of India, North Block, New Delhi, Boat Club, P. O. & P.S.- Boat Club, New Delhi.

¶15

The Director, The Central Bureau of Investigation, C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, P.O. & P.S. Lodi Road, New Delhi.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

¶18

CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶19

--------For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate Mrs. Niteshwari Kumari, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, A.G. Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C. to A.G.

¶20

¶21

48/Dated: 15.12.2025

¶22

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J. (Oral)

¶23

1. This instant Public Interest Litigation was filed in the year 2015 for the

¶24

grant of following reliefs:

¶25

a. For issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus upon the respondents especially respondent no. 7, 8 and 9 to resume the investigation as the notification vide Memo no. 2408, dated

¶26

Page 1 of 3

¶27

Neutral Citation No. 2025:JHHC:37649-DB

¶28

08.05.2014 and Memo No. 2407, issued by the respondent no.3 way back in May 2014, but till date the investigation has not been initiated, as because some senior officers of the Govt. of India, the then C.R.P.F. Officers and others are deeply involved in the crime called "surrender scam".

¶29

b. For the direction upon the respondents especially respondent no.9 to submit the status report of investigation.

¶30

c. For the direction upon the respondents to submit the total amount of money received and spent upon the rehabilitation of the Ex-Maoist, as the Maoist, who have surrendered, has not received support of the surrender policy.

¶31

d. For the direction upon the respondents rehabilitate the genuinely surrendered Maoist in true and proper perspective by withdrawing all the cases against them, so that, the policy for surrender of Maoist may act as a catalyst to this effect

¶32

2. Over the period of one decade this Court has passed various orders and even now the matter is stated to be still under investigation as is evident from para 20 of the affidavit dated 12^th of December 2025 filed on behalf of the Director General of Police, Jharkhand, through the S.P. (City), Ranchi, which reads as under:-

¶33

“20. That it is submitted that the present Investigating Officer of this case, Paras Ran, SP (City) has taken the charge of investigation of this case on 22/09/2025 and investigation is still continuing in the case and the updated status will be submitted before the Hon’ble Court as and when demanded.”

¶34

Page 2 of 3

¶35

Neutral Citation No. 2025:JHHC:37649-DB

¶36

3. Since the issue is a sensitive one and moreover, the investigation is still going on, we would not like to influence the investigation either way and would let it proceed in accordance with law.

¶37

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would then submit that there are certain individual grievances.

¶38

5. We make it clear that such grievances can always be redressed by this Court separately and cannot be made the subject matter of the writ petition which, in our considered opinion, has now achieved its purpose.

¶39

6. Therefore, while closing this petition we leave it open to the individuals to approach this Court for redressal of their grievances, if any, and in case the respondents do not proceed with the investigation, or, in any way, violate any of the orders that have been passed by the Court, it shall always be open to the petitioner to revive this petition.

¶40

7. As regards the individual claims regarding rehabilitation policy of grant of employment, it shall always be open to the individuals to approach this Court by way of separate writ petitions, as the same cannot be made the subject matter of the instant Public Interest Litigation.

¶41

8. With the aforesaid directions and observations, this Public Interest Litigation stands disposed of.

¶42

9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶43

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan, C.J.)

¶44

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶45

December 15, 2025

¶46

N.A.F.R.