\\fe&l.^l......... ^^/^^^^•^^. teB2!.........y^-^'^"^o() s' ^ -/—</^-—</7 €'BS;'^S IN THE mGH COURT OF CHHATHSGARH AT BILASPUR WRTTPETmON(Cr.)NO. \\^> /2011 PETmONER VERSUS Rajendra Singh, aged about 67 years S/o. Late Shri Madhav Singh, R/o House No.38/297, Near Hindu MUan Mandir, Hemu Nagar, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Secretary Department of General Administration Mantralaya, D.k.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director General of Police, Director General Office, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Superintendent ofPolice Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. Stadon House Officer PoUce Station- Takhatpur, BUaspur (C.G.) 5. Sanju Vyapari @ Sanjit, S/o Suml Ranjan Vyapari. Aged about 30 years, R/o. Infront ofDehat PoHce Station, Gandlu Nagar, Ambikapiir, District- Surguja (C.G.) WRTT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQNSTmJTION OT INDIA "l^L^ ^^^ .<3 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Cr.) N0.1126 OF 2011 PETITIONER Rajendra Singh RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Rahul Tamaskar & Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocates for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. Advocate General for the State. QRDER(ORA11 (Passed on this 1 day of September, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to handover the matter to the Central Bureau of Investigation. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the son of the petitioner namely; Anil Kumar Singh, while working as Sub Engineer in the SDO No.2, Sub Division, Depari:ment of Pubic Works, Bilaspur, died on 28-5-2010. According to the petitioner, there was some dispute and animosity in the mind of the respondent No.5 (contractor) with the son of the pe.titioner (deceased) for settlement of bills and accounts. The further allegation is that on 28-5-2010 on the invitation of the contractor the deceased accompanied him and his employees for dinner. When the deceased did not return to his house, his wife tried to contact him, but the same does not fructify. However, at about 12.30 A.M., one Shri Ravishankar Sharma informed the family members of the deceased that the deceased was lying beside the road in a critical condition. Thereafter, the family members ^ rushed to the spot and took the deceased to the hospital, where the tloctors declared him brought dead. Subsequently, the report was lodged before the Police Station, Takhatpur. The contention of the petitioner is that in spite of having sufficient evidence against respondent No.5, no action has been initiated against him and on the other hand, the charge sheet has been filed without any substantive evidence. Hence, this petition. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that after receipt of merg intimation with regard to death of the deceased, the police properly investigated the matter and recorded the statements of witnesses un'der the provisions of Section 161 ofthe Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the police also enquired about the phone call details and on the basis of the same the respondent No.5 was arrested. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet has been filed before the competent Court. On perusal of the record, it appears that the trial has already been commenced being Sessions Trial No.210/2010 before the Court of 5 Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, relating to crime No.260/2010 from Police Station Takhatpur, Bilaspur. The said fact is evident from the relief clause 10.1 of the petition. Thus, if there is any grievance, the petitioner is at liberty to move the trial Court by filing appropriate application underthe provisions ofthe Cr.P.C. In view of foregoing, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the trial Court, as aforestated, if so advised. If such a complaint/application is made before the trial Court, it is expected that the same shall be dealt with expeditiously in accbrdance with law and on its own merits. ('- Gowri Satish K. Agi Judge