‘ HIGH COIJRT OF CHHATTESGARH AT EiLASFiJR Writ Petitima {Ch} NG.§??1 of 2611 Petiticner Jasbeer Singh Hora, Son sf Shri Amrik Sénah Hira aa6d abcm 5’7 years rcsldent of Devendra Nagar Ralpur{CC) Versus Respondents 1. State of Ci‘f‘amsgarr tn ouch the Secretary, Department of Hmne D E’s Bhawan Mawtraiaya Rqipur 2. The Station Hausa .n—charge, Pmce Station Gale Bazar, Raipur (CG) (Writ Petitian under Ariide 22622? 0f the Constituticn 0f india} MLBP Shanna counsei far ihe pe€itiéner VrVmOd Te am Paue§ Lawyer fortre reapcndertsista‘ce €33: Hcn'b5€ Mr. T.P. $harma, J.) aRsER (1 3—1 1—201 1) 1. By this writ petitian under Articié 226/227 of :he Ccnstitution sf ind§a the petitioner has chaiienged the iegaiity and prcprieiy of i'ne aider dated 26.3.2699 passed by the First Additicnai sessions Judge, V‘ r Raipur, in Beii Appiicaticn 1'0.42gr’0§, whereby the Court beiow has made foiicwinq observaticn:— \‘x era mam/Wift‘mumm hmw%wewe$e—mewe smm§WMmw§§5Whis Weireeweameme‘esee ran the basis of observeiion the Court has seni a copy of the documeots along with case diary to poiioe authority for inqUirynnvestigarlon mating to commission of the of‘enoe ’! have heard learned counsei ‘or the petitioner peruse the order impugned and other documents flied on behaif of the petitioner . Learneo counsei for the Fettioner submits that by the order roughed the Court hes passed stricture against the petitioner eithuugh the Court .s oo'npeteht to pass the stricture againsr the person, out oerore I ’3 -2, g/assing such stricture the Court is fequiared to pm 'ide opportumty cf hearing and to expiam the circumstances, but in this case the Couri beiow has not provided any opportunity of hearing or opportuniiy of expianation to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsei pieced reiience in the matter oi Dr.i3iiip Khmer aeka and another V. State of Assam anti another‘ in which the Supreme Court has heid that Court shouid not pass adverse remark against such court or authority for arriving at the erroneous finding uniess there is materiai for such a conciusion. Learnee‘ eeunsei further pieced reiiance in the matter of Manish Cixit and others v. State of Rajasthan and other, connected mattersz in which the Supreme Court has heiakthat‘Court shouid not pass any stricture against the person without providing opportunity. Learned oounsei reiied upon the matter of Vidya Charan $huida v. state through Centrat Bureau of investigationg in which this Ccurt has ‘neid that without providing opportunity to the party the Court shouid not pass in stricture or remark and passing such remark is vioiation of fundamentai prinotpies of natural justice. 5. As per order impugned, at the time of passing the order won bait application fiied on behaif of other accused the Court was of View on the basis oi documents that there may be invoivement of the present petitioner. On the basis of documents the Court below has sent the documents to investigating agency for inquiry in accordance with iaw. 5. Whiie observing such facts virtuaiiy the Court beiow has not passed any remark or stricture against the present petitioner, but on the basis of materiai produced before it he has sent the materiai to investigating officer for proper inquiry in which the present petitioner has ampie opportunity of expianation or hearing. With the aforesaid observation without further comment, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. interim appiication stands disposed of. 4/ : Sd/_ (M’s; . .. 1 KC xi T.P. Sharma K2 i; Judge ' I 1(1 see) s s‘cc 234‘ town“. sccsee, \ s. tacos (1i) cotLJgfzzir-g J