Chattisgarh High Court
Arjun Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 June, 2024
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
Neutral Citation
2024:CGHC:21383-DB
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPCR No. 197 of 2024
1. Arjun Sahu S/o Bhagirathi Sahu, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village
Rudukela, P.S. Lailunga, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)
2. Tribhuwan Singh Rajput S/o Kunjbihari Rajput, Aged About 35 Years R/o
Ward No. 10, Bazarpara, Lailunga, District Raigarh (C.G.)
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan,
Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Superintendent Of Police, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)
3. The Station House Officer, Police Station Lailunga, District Raigarh
(C.G.)
4. Safi Ahmad S/o Shakil Ahmad, Aged About 35 Years R/o Ward No.13,
Kotaba Bypass Atal Chowk, Lailunga, District Raigarh (C.G.)
5. Tanvir Johan, Widow Of Late Said Sakil Ahmad, R/o Ward No.13, Kotaba
Bypass Atal Chowk, Lailunga, District Raigarh (C.G.)
6. Director, Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Ltd. Registered Office
Sahara India Bhawan, 1 Kapoorthala Complex Aliganj, District Lucknow
(U.P.)
7. Director, Chit Fund Company Sahara India, Sun Sine India And Shushk
India, Lailunga, District Raigarh (C.G.)
---- Respondents
(Cause Title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate
For State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Adv.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr. Sachin Singh Rajput, Judge
Order on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
25/06/2024
1. Heard counsel for the parties.
Neutral Citation
2024:CGHC:21383-DB
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following
prayer:
"i. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an
appropriate writ by directing the respondent No.1 to 3 to take
necessary appropriate action upon complaint of the petitioners
against private respondent No.4 to 6 and other beneficiary
responsible persons according to the law laid down by Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari v. State of U.P. in the
interest of justice.
ii. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the
respondent No.1 to 3 to register FIR against the private respondents
4 to 6 and other beneficiary persons under Section 420, 34 of IPC in
the interest of justice.
iii. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue direction
to recover the invested money with interest from the private
respondents 4 to 6 and to return the same to the petitioners, in the
interest of justice.
iv. Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and
circumstances of the case, may also be granted."
3. In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the
respondents-authorities to register FIR against the respondent 4 to 6.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that despite several
complaints having being made by petitioner to the respondent authorities for
registration of FIR against the respondents 4 to 6, the same has not been
registered.
5. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that the
grievance of the petitioner can be very well redressed before the Court
below by filing an application under Section 156(3) or 200 of the Cr.P.C. He
Neutral Citation
2024:CGHC:21383-DB
further submits that the controversy involved in the present matter has
already been decided by the High Court of Allahabad in Misc. Bench No.
24492 of 2020 : Waseem Haider Vs. State of U.P. Through Principal
Secretary, Home Others vide judgment and order dated 14.12.2020 as well
as by this Court in WPCR No. 333 of 2020 (Akhilesh2024:CGHC:7737-DB
Agrawal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) decided on 12.04.2023,
dismissing the said petition, hence, the present petition be also dismissed in
terms of the said order.
6. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to the
petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy before appropriate Forum.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Sachin Singh Rajput) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Deepti
