HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT aLASPUR ^ DB: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N, Chandrakar. JJ. W.P. (Habeas Comus) No. 7540/2010 Petjtioner Respondents Vs. 1. 2. 3. 4. Charma, S/o Pandi Gond, aged about 50 years, R/o Village Karekatta, Post Sitagaon, P.S. Manpur, Distrkst Rajnandgaon (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary, Home Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Superintendentof Police, Rajnandgaon, Distrtet Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Station House Officer, Poltee Station Manpur, Tahsil-Manpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Danuram, S/o Chamra, aged about 25 yeare, Speciat Police OfRcer (SPO), P.S. Manpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) W.P. (Habeas Corpusl No. 7543 of2010 Petittoner <^ Respondents Vs. 1. 2. 3. Dalluram, S/o Manduram, ^ed about 35 years, R/o Village Kekdehur, Post Sitagaon, P.S. Aundhi, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary, Home Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Superintendent of Police, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Station Hbuse Offteer, Pdice Statjon Aundhi, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Mane Singh Tulavi, S/o Manduram, aged about 27 years, Spedal PoBce Officer (SPO), P.S. Aundhi, Dist4riet Rajnandgaon (C.G.) vj^nssafsatasKii W.P. (Habeas Corpus) No. 7645 of2010 PetjUoner Respondents Vs. Phool Singh, S/o Jhitiram Gond, aged about 30 yeara, R/o Village Karekatta, Post Sttagaon, P.S. Manpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Threugh : Secretary, Home Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Ralpur (C.G.) 2. Superintendent of Police, Rajnanygaon, Distrtet Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3. Station House Officer, Poltoe Statis^i Aundhi, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4. Harsuram, aged about 26 years, S/o Jhitlram Gond, aged about 26 years, Special Police Officer (SPO), P.S. Manpur, District Rajnandgaon (C G.) W.P. (Habeas Corpus) No. 7S61 of 2010 P^iH<w>N Resoondents Vs. 2. 3. 4. Ohaniram Aachta, S/o Shobhuram, aged about 45 years, R/o Village Sendawahi, Post Sitagaon, P.S. Aundhi, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary, Home Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Superintendent of Police, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Station House Offlcer, Police Station Aundhi, Tahsil-Manpur, Distrtet Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Sonsai Aachala, S/o Dhaniram Aachta, aged about 24 years, Special Police Offlcer (SPO), P.S. Manpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) W.P. (Habeas Corpusl No. 7552 of 2010 Petitioner Daarsu Ram, S/o Tirgu, aged about 65 years, R/o \flllage Sendawahi, Post SUagaon, P.S. Aundhl, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Vs. Respondents 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretary, Home Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Superintendent of Police, Rafnandgaon, Distrtot Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3. Station House Officer, Poltee Station Aundhi, Tahsil-Manpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4. Sukuram, S/o Daarsu Ram, aged about 27 years, Speciat Poltee Officer (SPO), P.S. Aundhl, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Wrft Pettttons under Articte 226 ofthe Constitution oflndla Present Shri Anup Majumdar with Shri Kamal Tekam, counsel for the petitioners. Shrf Vinay Hactt, Deputy Advocate General for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 4th January, 201 1) Pef'DhsfyfKifaasSshfa. J ^. With the consent ot &ie parties, thsse pstitions are being disposed o? by iftis c&mm&n order. 2. Gnsvance of the petitioners in these petitions are that their sons/wards have been itlegatty detained by the police offlcials and thcy have been foreed to workas Special Police Officer under police station, Manpur and Aundhi. tt has bean further alleged that the police authorities are not granting the petitioners to have access to respondent No. 4. In th^se circumstances, it has been plesded that the respondent authorities be directed to produce respondent No. 4 before this Court and custody of the respondent No. 4 may be granted to the petitionors. It has also been pleaded that the respondent authoritfes may further be directed not to harass and torture the petitioners or thsir family members on account of not joining on the post of Special Police Oficer. 3. Shrt Vinay Harit, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State, on instructions from Shri Sujeet Kumar, Additional Superintendent of Potice, Rajnandgaon, submits that respondent No. 4 in alt thest petitions were recruited as Special Police Officer on their own requ^I and they are discharging their duties as S. P.0. on their freewill under the police authorities of their respective place of posting. The reiatives of the respondent No. 4 are free to meet them. They are also being paid due remuneration as per rules. He further undertakes that as and when' the pelitioners want to contact the respondent No. 4 of these pefitions, they are free to contact them and in case they (Respondent No. 4) are nol dssirous of discharging their duties as S.P.O. they are freet&tiuSthejob. 4. The a&ove submission <rf Shri Vinay Harit is taken on record. 5. On Ihe otfter hand, Shri Majumdar, leamed counsel for the petitionfti suSmits tbat in wew oC the submission made by fearned Deputy Advocate Generaf, these petttions may be disposed of with liberty to the petitioners and respondent No. 4 to have recourse to legal remedies for their grievance raised in these petitions. 6. In view of the above submission made by learned counsel for the parties, nothing survives in these petitions and same are accordingly disposed of. However, respondent No. 4 shalt be at liberty to take ) |l!i|« recourse to remedies available under law for any atleged wrong done to them by the police officlals. 7. Certified copy today. v'm Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge