S.\ei\ fr7j IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR. WMT PETITION N0. l^-o7 OF 2004 / PETITIONER / T.S.RAJPUT, S/0 SHRI PHOOL SINGH RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, ASSISTANT GRADE-III, P.H.E. DIVISION, BAIKUNTHPUR, DISTRICT KOREA, (C.G.) V E R SLL^ RESPONDENTS yw^\ ^•^M^ ^^edb^-^"^ '^^-•""" - 0^•^^' 1. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, THROUGH: THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, D.K.S. BHAWAN, RAIPUR, (C.G.). 2. • THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DISTRICT KOREA, (C.G.) 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION BAIKUNTHPUR, DISTRICT KOREA, (C.G.) 4. SHRI P.S. RAO, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.H.E. DIVISION BAIKUNTHPUR, DISTRICT KOREA, (C.G.). 5. SHRI VUENDRA KUMAR MISHRA, SUB ENGINEER, . P.H.E. DIVISION, BAIKUNTHPUR, DISTRICT KOREA, (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2^6/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF WD1A FOR ISSUANCE OF AN APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/CERTIORARI ETC. OR DIRECTION/ORDER D< THE LIKE NATURE ETC, r XI-HC-78 HP1C51 ^*TI<1» vi-oq <-qiqic)<1, tPTnlx-l*l<?, R«ltiy1< rf^ ..^p^*.^0.'^..——". 31T^5T tRq? (4cli^<s|<£;) 3n^$T^TRTiw ^iT3IT^^T^Tte SI^IT^n;?rf^T 3H^^T 17 8 2005 Shri Rahul Birtharey, coun^t for the petitioner. Shri R.R. Sinha, Panel Lawy^ 226/227 of the Constitution of I^ <PI<|IC^<(I^ +ii<ic^T^'fol<9 ^RI^IX ^3lRl4l311^^T r for respondents No.l to 3. Heard both the counsel. The petitioner has pref^rred this writ petition under Articie idio» The mdn 9rievance of the petitioner is that th€ petitioner had wi|"hdrGwn the amount to the tune of Rs.4J2,338/a by cheque for mokitig poyment of soiary to the employees of P.H.E Division Bdkunthpur, ^anendragarh and Chirmiri. After disbursement of th©sdary, an a|nount of Rs.1,18,500/- was ieftwith the petitioner which was stili to be di^bursed to the employees. As there was no faciiity of locker, the petitioner^ Rs.l,0)p00/- from the petitioner^ gave Rs.l,CX),000/- to respondent) senior, th©petitioner WGS not in why he had not taken any receipt petitioner went to the house of r^ kept the balance amount in his house. However, on 3rd May 2003 at ab4it 7:30 pm re^pond&nt No.5 came to the house of the petitioner and erKjui^ed as to how much amount was ieft with him. ^fter ©nquiry,respondent h|o.5 ^ent back and a9Qin came at ll:30pm and told the petitioner that r^spondent No.4 hos sent him to bring . Beiieving the statement the petitioner No.5. As respondents No.4 ond 5 being positton to refus®the same and that is from respondent hto.5. On 4-5-2003, the spondent No.4 for return of money, then he asked the petitioner to fil! t^he form of 6reneral Provident Fund for arranym Rs.lpOpOO/- and threQfened th©petitioner not to bdge F.I.R. to the Poiice Station. However, th^ petitioner went to the Poiice Station. Respondent No.3 ^ent one head c<j instdbje ond one Sepoy with him with the ^4 ^w ^<i«ic'5«,u>Ti1'<-i4i<»,Rtomy< *ll*i<»i^F^T^ ' W^200 3TI^$Tq^I? ((jc||^cj<£;) 3??^tT^Ti^Tt<P ^P?T3TI^tTaRte ^ Barve ?;^TT$R^rfl^T 3T1^^T -^' petitioner to th©house of respond were sitting together. After sec assured the poiice and th©petition< case should not be registered. When respondents No.4 an petitioner withdrew Rs.50,000/- Rs.50,000/- from other employee^ Chirmiri, but the amount WGS no1 petitioner went to the Police Stat but the case was not registered. T respondent No.3 be directed to rec The petitioner has an iodging the compldnt under Se competent authority, hence the p crimina! Court of competent jurisdi In view of the obove, I do n' same is liable to be dismissed and i1 Consequently, M.(W.)P. No.2 stand disposed of. <pi<ifo<nvi <ii*ioT^a f^^si ^Ri^-ci^ ^3rf^T3V?^^T ^nt No.4 where respondents No.4 ond 5 ng th©police, respondents No.4 and 5 r that they wouid make the payment and ij 5 had not returned the amount, the from his <5.P.F. account and remaining and paid the saicries of employees of returned by re^pondents. Agdn, the jon for lodgir^ the report on 2»7«2003, tierefore, fhe petitioner has prayed that ister the case. remedy in the criminal law by ;tion 200 of the Cr.P.C. before the etitioner can fiie complaint before the :tion. ?t find any substance in this p&tition, the is accordingiy dismissed. 029/2005 ond I. A. No.6835/2005 aiso alt^rnative Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge SP/FS/2005-20,000 y