^ -^ ^e^>2— MTHE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR W.P.fC]No./ci ^7/200"^ Petitioner <y^-^•' ^.'•^••" '^ ^;^/' / ^K; Rai, s/o Shri Raj Mangal Rai, ''^y ^e?. al?°^ ^ryear?I/?v^c!.N?" ir'' ^. 15, North Jharakhand, Distrcit - Koria [C.G.], Presently working as Secretary, Chhattisgarh Branch, Indian National Trade Union Congress' (INTUC) and Member Steering Committee, Rashtriya Coltiery Mazdoor Congress [C.G.] Versus •'"T) State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Home Department, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, [C.G.] 2> 3) 4) ^ Chhattisgarh Police, through its Director-General of Police, Police Head Quarter, Raipur, District - Raipur [C.G.] The Senior Superintendent of Police, District- Koria, Koria [C.G.] Station House Officer, Potice Station Manendragarh, District - Koria [C.G.] 5)-^ South Eastern Coalfields Limited, through its Chief General Manager, Seepat Road, Bilaspur [C.G.] 6)^ Deepak Jaiswal, Senior Vaidya, r/o B-21/22, Indira Vihar, SECL Colony, Seepat Road, Bilaspur [C.G.] 7) A.K. Shukla, ex-Chief Manager, SECL. General 8) G.R. Pachisia, ex-General Manager, SECL. •i'i'.'. ' . '••^ s V (M l^ /i E fo f=l fm 10 13 1> ^ f^ 10 lr~ |m IN |1\5 101 |0 l~n fl Im ^) ^ c^ COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILA8PUR WRIT PETmON (C) N0. 1927 OF 2007 Petitioner Respondents Veraus P.K.Rai State ofChhattisgarh & Others ;ll-, WRTT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTn'UTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. Agiiaiotri, J.) Present:- Shri P.R.Patankar, Advocate for the petitiotier. Shri Shashaiik Thakur, Paiiel Lawyer for the State. Shri Yogesh Pandey, Advocate for respondent No.6. J. (Passsd on 23r'1 day ofJuly, 2010) The case of the petitioner is that, despite several complaints dated 28/9/2005, 8/12/2005 & 10/9/2006, no steps have been taken by the police aufhorities. Leamed counsel appearitig for the petitioner subnuts the facts of the instaiit case is squarely covered by a decision of Supreme Cous-t in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. & others^. Thus, the petitioner may be pemutted to withdraw tliis petition witii liberty to file appropriate complaint under flie provisipns of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for slwrt 'the Cr.P.C.') before the Magistrate. Leamed counsel appearing for other side has no objection. . Accordingly, tlie . writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with fhe aforestated libertv. Sd^- .: Satish K.Agnihotri , Judge ; , (2008) 2 SCC 409