IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHI-IATISGARIL BILASPUR (CEIIIAI‘TISGARH) CrMy. N0. W 0 OF 2011 PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CREMTNAL PROCEBURE, 1973 F012 GIVING APPROPRIATE ORDER TO RESPONDENTS FGR REGISTRATION OF CASE UNDER SECTION 307 F I.P.C. AGAINST RESPONDENT N. 6/ BAI'IADUR YADAV 1N ABDTON TO RIME NO. 273 /11 REGISTERED AT POLICE STATION TAKHATPUR FOR OFFENCES PUNISITABLE UNDER SECTION 294, 323, 506 OF I.P.C. O O TT C PETITIONER Santosh Yadav, S/o Shri Kaniram Yadav, Aged about 3O years, R/o a 6€ , Khamhariya, Police Station p mgég R “a ,W am é f ‘ ‘72 Takhatpur, Distt. Bilaspur (CG) mi Versus RESPONDENTS: 1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Home (Police), DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG) 2. The Director General of Police, Police Headquarters, Raipur (CG) 3. The Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur (CG) 4. The Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (CG) 5. The Station House Officer, Police Station Takhatpur, Distt. Bilaspur (CG) 6. Bahadur Yadav, S/o Late Jaipal Yadav, R/o Kharnhariya, Police Station Takhatpur, Distt. Bilaspur (CG) ané‘z‘Wfzaia; ammésrmfa Wmm wwweiww ammm SB : Hon’ble Shri/Manindra Mahan Shrivastava. J. 25. 1 1.201 1 Shri U.K.S. Chandel, counsel for the petitioner. Lawyer Shri Vaibhav State/respondents No. 1 to 5, o Heard on admission. This petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by registration of FIR under Crime the petitioner for quashmg No.273/ 11 for oEence under Sections 323, 294 and 506 of the IPC as horities for registration of case under Section 307iof the IPC against the offender] respondent No.6. Learned counsel for the : which the petitioner was as sustained by him and the att the FIR, the police ought to Section 307 of the IPC, but respondent No.6, the police registered offence tinder Sectic He submits that the FIR and facie make out a case of com ission of offence under Section 307 of the IPC. Therefore, it was ob 'gatory on the part of Station House register offence under Section 307 of the IPC. R Panel fof the :1 advance copy. Goverclhan, also for direction to police aut getitioner submits that the manner in ‘saulted and the nature of injuries andingicjrcnmstances, as reflected in have w registered odence under 1'11 order to extend undue favour to of Police Station —Takhatpur has )ns 323, 294 and 506 of the IPC only. medical report is sufficient to prima . C'W’mfHDwzbgé/ “a“ W (new) Officer of the concerned p0 'ce station to mm W200 31Wm (Wm ammfaha‘ ammm WWW “2v WW w’m awmnm Admittedly, the matter Ls under investigation and the same is not complete. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that so far .tchargershe‘et has not been filed. He submits that his statement under sect10n1610fthe Cr.P.C. has been recorded and the police is seized of the matter On the other hand learned counsel for the State submits that the matter 1s under mvesug t10n and at this stage it is premature because the complete pictur w1ll emerge only after investigatlon 1s complete and charge—sheet f ed by the pohce. He subm1ts that the police have alreldy'registere offence under Section 323, 294 and 506 of the IPC. Whether as ultimate result, in the investigation a case of commission of oEence under Section 307 of the IPC would be made out or not, cannot be g ne inn) at this stage. The petitioner would be at liberty to take recourse to appropriate remedy as may e available to him under the law if the police submits its report be ore the Magistrate after completion of ‘ mvestlgatlon It 1s however directed that the police authorlty shall hold fair and proper investigation on e allegation W1th the aforesaid obs rvatlons the pet1t10n 1s finally dlsposed of. Praveen Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge