:N ‘ THE HON BLE HIGH couRT oF JUDICATURE AT BILASPU WRIT PETITION ( Crimina‘la) No.. w :80F ? 2010 ' : / 'K. M Prdhn 5/0 ‘Shri P.‘M Pradhana . aa . ' “Aged Abou‘f‘61‘ years, OccupaTion'; / Phig Ad Dc d S‘in ' i Court Mahasmund RJail Rd’ Mhd , Dj Mhd (G) R i (ca) § T 3) i s 1 z l PETITIONR- E aefi’cn vocatat istri an ess’o 'a i/o.‘'‘ oa aasdmun I sft- aasamun C.. T T z g l ESPONDENTS i Th S’rf CkihtUh e ate‘o‘ af‘l’isgarhghrog T y m Depf . he Secre’rar e artmen D.K.S hawan Rmur “ 6 . 2‘ / Mahasam d- D mund ( C G) B p (C ) . The Supe nTende Tof Poluce lsf’r Mahasa u Diisiona Ocer olce , Saraal, is”.- ahasamun (_C.. tatio ouse oie oc SaTio qbara; ’isffi} ahaamun ‘6;6. _, () . I l l \ t K l x ’ (D 0;“ ;/'“ 3§N$LE mm VERSUS / §§ R 1 Sb Vl ffi Pi ipi D Md 6) Sn H ffcr Plie Tn Bgh D MSd ,1 4 T i.‘ I IGH @OURT OF HHATTIARI AT BILASPU 1 WRIT PETITION (Cr NO? 5087 OF ZM PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONTUTON OF INDIA (SB Hon’ble Mr Satlsh K Aqmhon, S tm, ,zc r ' i hn Awadh Tnpa lvoc‘fa'/t‘e‘forjtfe petmone hn M P S Bhatla Dy Govt Advacate for the State! espondents ‘ Passed on 18 day ofOcr 2010) hallenge In this petition Is to the Investigation Initiated against I Ithe petitioner alongwuth o 'er person on the basis of FIR dat 'm vestlgatlon ls st!“ gomg on and nothing has come out on the V Investigation f. Learned counsel aopeanng for the petitioner submits that In the t p'inlon of Deputy Director Prosecution dated 11 12 2907 _, L _ s I I o I (Annexure P-Q) and the InqUIry report dated 29 4 2008 (Annexure 10) no case has been found agamst the petitioner Thu investigation must be closed so far as the petitioner Is concer lnlresoonse the State has tiled replv as follows “3 That submISSIon of the answenng respondents/St that there Is named F l R against the petitioner which was lodged on the report of the present Branch Mger namely Amanka Prasac I ana l handrakar for of‘ nder Section 420 467‘ I 468 and f C f u _* mpletlon of to ither file the charge-s d Vldence are found agal l su a n nst' fficient materl‘ . etltloner and In case nothmg Is found agalnst etitioner they Wlll be filing the nal report However a ‘ ‘ H SGL R O “ x é l WRlTi I SITI t J) S . r _ ( teje C I) j ed ‘ ned "' ' I t e ) ‘ at” s ‘ ‘ o h e he at p t: Pe’titionér r ; . ‘ : ‘ K M Pradhan” . i , ‘ , , Versus , .V j ,l a ¢ _ _ Respondents ~ x W i _i ‘ :1 The State of uhha'ttisga'rh & v ’ ‘ ' V Others t/Stt t k y I r o pn y sd g o ’ nce h Ta I Is uby sbmrtte ha so ar as th etiioner has referred to letter dat d 01/12/200 writte y the S DO P Mahasamund dressed o the Dy irector Admrnrstratron/Pubhc Pros outron Chhat Isgarh alpur (Annexure P19) and the re y of the Dy Drrecto ated 11/12/2007 In whrch rt rs mentioned that If th earch report prepared by the petitioner rs as per th present the respondensae canno mae an statements With regard to whether they WIII ftte charge- sheet or fmat report as it wout depend upon thei pinion after the completion of the: vestigatton and uo the result ofthe investigation However rt rs most humbt ubmitte that srnce at present the Investigatron Is gom n therefore the present petition rs premature and the' Investigation cannot be ctosed as rt relates to the offe under Section 420 467 468 and 1203 of te l P C . ules and is on the hasrs of the goyemment documents _ n that case no offence would be made out against th etrtroner lt is humbly submrttéd that tt‘e polrce rs nvestrgatrng whether the search report rs based upon th overnment documents and was as per the rules or ho‘ In thrs regard rt rs also mentioned in the letter dated 0/04/2008 by the S D G Maha aund addressed to P/1 hat he an ff’cersahave submitte before th investigating ofricer hat they did not give any instructrons to the petitioner fo reparing a search report wrth regard to the land i isput 0) t t bk * ’7“ o , t r p n _ Ide l e n reply, it is clearly stated that if it is found that the opinion of th Duty Director Administration/Public Prosetion ad n he W ep cu n ii t nqurr was in accordance wrth law and on the basrs overnment documens in that event no offenc d out against the petitioner Thus the submrssron of the petitioner ‘ i i ' hat Investigation should be closed as afore-stated at this stage _ s neither proper nor rust Let the Investiatin authoritie r1 com ee its investioation an take aporoorrate action in ' z ade th la. ccoranc wr w l n View of the above the petition is devoided of merit and Is 2 ccordingly dismissed No order asto cos r t l i gg s. 5 _ ‘ lt d i _ sd/ s é Satih K. Am'hmh‘ Jude g 4 ht t hml U tt f e , t pt 7 n - ‘b t g V D s R r - d e s e ‘ , r _ t e ‘p _ ' ‘r e g ' 2 m iy, of ’ 3 » i g t e woul be made l w .. a ts l l i l