CY“% @ 1N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION No. 3i 3 L /2003 / PETITIONER ' Shashikiran Tirkey D10 T I; r Agastia Tirkey I ,N / Aged about 19yrs, R/o Villagem I‘: Belkota RS. Batouli Th-See’rapur/ Dist. Surguja VERSUS (01) PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER: The details of the Petitioner are shown in the cause title. “ghee. ‘ RESPONDENTS State of C.G. through Secretary Home Raipur (C.G.) ’ 2. Station House OEcer r \0§ "..-"‘ .. Police Station, Ambikapur (C.G.) g%q&§%€ .. \ ‘Q§0' 3. Superintendent ofPoIice Surguja—Ambikapur (C‘G.) 4. Dilkumar Uraon 8/0 Sri Etwaram / Age 30yrs, Occu. -' Police ,5 Constable under Superintendent I/ ofPoh‘ce Ambikapm, R/o Belkota, P.SI Bataouli, Dist- Surguja (CG) \a ’ a}; ‘t SEW“: 5. Mr. Bhggat 3.1101). / Ambikapur, Dist.»Surguja (CG) / HN, Singh, Head Constable PS. Ambikapur, Dist.— Surguja (CG) ’ XI~HC~22 3a:mmaqE mv@;%EEHI unwHanwm ¥i §R ¥I WW WW $Wm mmm 14/11/2003 Smt. Hamida Siddiqui, cuunsel for the petitioner. Shri Ranbir Singh, G.A‘ far the respcndent/ State. Heard. The case of the petitioner is that on 13/05/2002 when the petitioner was residing at Nannakala Ambikapur with her Nani, accused - Dilsai Uraon along with Brijesh Tiwari and Dil Kumar Uraon — respondent no,4 in this petition, who is a Police Constable at Police Station Ambikapur came to Namnakala and informed the petitioner that her father is ill anQ he has called her at Belkota, Believing the information the petitioner was sent by her Nani with Dilsai Uraon and Dilsai Uraon took the petitioner to Police Line, Ambikapur in the quarter of ”espondent no‘4 - Dil Kumar Uraon where Daisay committed rape on the petitioner on several times. Dil Kumar Uraon - responde 1t no.4 and Brijesh Tiwari assisted Dilsai for committing rape on the petitioner and Dil Kumar Uraon \ and Brijesh Tiwari obtained the sigiatures of the petitioner on blank papers and when she went to odge the report along with her father on 10/08/2002 to Dehati ’I‘hana Ambikapur, Police had refused to register the case against the police person and then on the next day i.e., 11/08/2002 she went to S.D.O‘ Mr. Bhagat, - respondent no.5, WW WW éa‘wm / but he also refused to register the report then she went to Superintendent of Police, Ambikapul‘ who directed the Police Station to register the first information report. In pursuance of that, when the petitioner along with her father nt to Police Station, the police officers abused and harassed th and they threatened and said that the name of Dilkumar Mshoud not be entered in the first information report. Crime No.420 2002 was registered against all accused persons and after investiga ion disbelieving the statement of prosecutrix the clean chit has been given by the investigating officer to Dilkumer juet because he w e the employee of the Police Department and in final report he name of Dilkumr has been deleted from the list of accused an no charge sheet has been filed r I against Dilkumar whereas the ca against Dilsai was made out under Section 376(G) of IPC. The endent no 4 who is a driver of respondent no.5 at the time of co ssion of offence, has shown his duty and gave a false certificate reg ding the duty. It is, therefore, prayed that the respondents be di ected to charge—sheet against Dilkumar Oraon and Departmen Enquiry be instituted against respondents no. 4 and 5. Having heard learned counse for the petitioner, as far as the‘i question of filing charge-sheet again t respondent no.4 is concernedil l e e s p m i t XI—HC—22 3m mmseem‘ awareness the petitioner is at-liberty to malq: an application W before the Competent Couxt under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, therefore, there is a‘h alternative remedy available to the petitioner. So far as Departmentirl Enquiry is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner submittEd that the petitioner may be allowed to make a representation to the Director General of Police and he be directed to decide the repi'esentation to which the learned Government Advocate has no objection. Having heard learned counslel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstamfes of the case, the petitioner is allowed to make a representation raising all her grievances to the Director General of Police within a Iperiod of 15 Clays, who in turn, / . shall decide the said representation and take an appropriate decision in an objective manner and with a reasoned order within another one month. With the aforesaid observaiions and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, I.A.No. 92l4/QOO3 for urgent stands disposed of, Mr L.c.BHADoo my Certified copy as per rules. 1m mm