For Petitioner : Mr. Sushil Dubey, Advocate
For Respondents/State : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge
1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
in connection with Crime No. 08/2026 registered at Police Station
Jainagar, District Surajpur, and for inclusion of private respondents No.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the
"10.1 It is therefore prayed that, this Hon'ble
Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire
records pertaining to the case of the petitioner.
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be
pleased to issue a writ/order/direction in nature
of mandamus whereby to direct to the
Respondent Authorities No. 4 and 5 to make the
private Respondents No. 6 to 12 as accused in
the offence in connection with Crime No. 8/2026
registered by the Police of Police Station -
Jainagar and further be pleased to direct to the
concerned police to record the statement of the
witnesses in writing as well as in videography
and submit the charge-sheet after proper and
unbiased investigation in the present case.
10.3 That, any other relief/reliefs, which this
Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of
the petition, may also please be granted to the
petitioner."
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that on 03.01.2026 between 12:00
PM and 1:00 PM, her husband, namely Ramlallu Agariya, was brutally
assaulted at their residence in village Dwarikanagar, District Surajpur,
by a group of persons including Temsai, Genda Bihari and private
respondents No. 6 to 12, who allegedly formed an unlawful assembly
armed with lathis and other weapons. It is alleged that the accused
persons launched a premeditated and coordinated attack, causing
grievous injuries to the deceased. The petitioner, being an eye-witness,
along with other witnesses including the victim's brother Anil, witnessed
the entire incident. It is further alleged that after the initial assault, two
of the accused, namely Daljeet and Thakur Singh, again assaulted the
injured victim and issued threats. The victim was thereafter taken to the
hospital, where he was declared dead due to the injuries sustained in
the incident.
******* It is further the case of the petitioner that despite the involvement
of multiple accused persons, the police registered Crime No. 08/2026 at
Police Station Jainagar only against two persons, namely Temsai and
Genda Bihari, allegedly suppressing the role of the remaining accused
persons. The petitioner has alleged serious irregularities and bias in the
investigation, including manipulation of witness statements, failure to
seize proper weapons and material evidence, and fraudulent
preparation of the FIR in the name of the complainant Anil. The
petitioner submitted representations dated 19.01.2026 and 02.02.2026
before the concerned authorities seeking fair investigation and inclusion
of all accused persons, however, no effective action has been taken till
date, compelling the petitioner to approach this Court by way of the
present writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the
wife of the deceased and an eye-witness to the incident in question. It
is contended that though the First Information Report has been lodged
by the brother of the deceased against only two persons, namely
Temsai Paikra and Gend Bihari Paikra, the petitioner has consistently
disclosed the active participation of private respondents No. 6 to 12 in
the commission of the offence. Despite such specific allegations and
disclosure of their involvement, the concerned police authorities have
failed to array the said private respondents as accused persons and are
proceeding only against the aforesaid two named accused, thereby
conducting a selective and biased investigation.
******* It is further submitted that the petitioner has already made
representations before the Inspector General of Police and the
Superintendent of Police, bringing to their notice the involvement of
private respondents No. 6 to 12 and seeking their inclusion as accused
in the case; however, no effective action has been taken till date. It is
thus argued that the inaction on the part of the police authorities has
resulted in denial of a fair and proper investigation, warranting
interference by this Hon'ble Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.
5. Learned State counsel would submit that the First Information Report in
the present case has already been registered and the matter is
presently under investigation by the competent police authorities. It is
contended that during the course of investigation, statements of
witnesses are being recorded and all relevant aspects, including the
role of each person alleged to be involved in the incident, are being
duly examined in accordance with law. It is further submitted that at this
stage, the investigation is at a nascent stage and no final conclusion
has yet been arrived at.
******* It is further submitted that it is within the domain of the
investigating agency to identify and array the accused persons on the
basis of evidence collected during investigation, and no direction can
be issued by this Hon'ble Court to include any particular person as an
accused. Learned State counsel submits that the investigating agency
shall conduct a fair and impartial investigation and, upon completion
thereof, submit the appropriate police report in accordance with law.
Therefore, no interference is called for at this stage.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and upon
perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the First
Information Report in the present case has already been registered and
the investigation is admittedly in progress. The grievance of the
petitioner primarily relates to non-inclusion of private respondents No. 6
to 12 as accused persons and alleged bias in the investigation.
8. It is a settled position of law that the scope of interference by this Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in matters relating to
investigation is limited. The investigation of a criminal case squarely
falls within the domain of the investigating agency, and it is for the
police authorities to collect evidence and determine the complicity of
persons involved in the alleged offence. At this stage, when the
investigation is still at a nascent stage, no direction can be issued by
this Court to array particular individuals as accused.
9. The allegations made by the petitioner regarding improper
investigation, non-recording of statements, or exclusion of certain
persons can very well be looked into by the investigating agency during
the course of investigation. In case the petitioner is still aggrieved,
appropriate remedy lies under the provisions of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, including approaching the competent Magistrate.
10. This Court also takes note of the submission of the learned State
counsel that the investigating agency is proceeding in accordance with
law and shall conduct a fair and impartial investigation. In absence of
any exceptional circumstances or material to demonstrate deliberate
inaction or mala fide on the part of the investigating agency at this
stage, no case for interference is made out.
11. Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be and
is hereby dismissed. However, it is observed that the investigating
agency shall proceed with the investigation strictly in accordance with
law and shall not be influenced by any observation made herein. The
petitioner shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedy as available
under law, if so advised.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
ved
