' v 0/ A BEFORE THE J‘UDICATURE D}? HON'ELE CHHATTISGARH HIGH COUR’i / \ @ (WRIT UNDER ‘R’l‘I-CLE 226/227 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) x s/o Late Shri N.K. Diwan agea about 42 years, Tahasildar’ Dhamadha District Burg (C.G.?R/o ! Q.N.206, New Housing Boani Complex Opp. New Bus stand, Burg (C.G.) “z AT BILA SPUR m v7.13. (él/ /2001 ‘9}:‘TETIONER3: v 1: Sanjay Kumar Diwan VERSUS / /7 Through Chief Secretary Raipur 2. Lok Ayukta Through secretary, Bhopal (M3).) old Sachiwélaya, Bhopal (M.P.§ 3. ESuperintendent 1>olice, Special Police Establishment Lok Ayukta, Raipur (C.G.) 4. Shri Anil Pathak, Inspector of Police Special yol‘ice Establish- ment Lok AyukiiaQ Raipur Inves— ting Officer : l" . State of Chhattisgarh ’ a: WRIT PETITIDN UNDER ARTICLE 226,227 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA . Above named petitioner respectfully submit as under :— ..2.. XLBC—QZ m em %wr§; 31W WW 11m 07/01/2002 :- pefifioner‘. Shri Sonjay Kumar‘ Damian, iear-ned counsei for The learned counsel for fhe Shri Rajiv Sh rivasfava, Sm‘re. Heard. on 02/03/2001 agains‘r The A repor? was lodged x» been submif‘red by respondel 11' Noi4 Shri Anil Paihak Inspecfor of Police, Special Police Esfablishmenf, Lol-(ayukfa, Raipur‘ as Invesfigafing Officer. for qfJashing The inveSfigafion direc'r ofhers. l I have carefully pei allegations have been made agair under various provisions of law a . iv i _ facTs‘and circumsmnces of sucl for fhis Cour‘r in exercise of i' under Arficle 226 of fhe ConS' wifh The invesfigaflon. In my v seek remedy before any appro mah‘er is now spending before L V To the peTiTioner To approachmfhe said aufhorify for redreis‘ggl pefiTioner's. 5%7mnshfed copy from Hindi info Engiish haé 'used fhe report Various is? ‘rhe pefifioners and oThers regarding corrup‘l’ion. In The i a case if will nof be proper- rs exfra ordinary jurisdicfion 'i‘rufion of India fo im‘erfere ew if is for fhe pefifioner To priaTe aufhorify. Since fhis okayukfa, in my view if is open The main relief sough‘i in fhis pefi‘rion is ed agains‘r 1’he peTifionergand é (95%? /"\w x wmmgafaaga) mmmm WW? WW éaaw’r‘‘vnwm of his grievance. Af this sfage in my View if will nof be fair To in‘rer‘fere wi‘rh We invesfigc‘rion on The basis of Tha reporf sfafed above. GRPRJ—FS/ 7 Accordingly fhis pmifion is rejecfgé. \V r i mi mm Sci/~ W.A.SHISHAK CHIEF JusTICE //f//? Icé/