Anand Kumar Choudhary vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2104 Jhar

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 W.P.(C) No.801 of 2020

            Anand Kumar Choudhary                            .....   ... Petitioner
                                              Versus
            1. The State of Jharkhand.
            2. Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad.
            3. Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad.
            4. Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhanbad.                 .... .... Respondents
                                        --------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

------

            For the Petitioner            : Mr. Sanjay Prasad, Advocate
            For the Respondents           : Mr. Ashok Yadav, G.A. I
                                       --------

05/29.06.2021     The present writ petition is taken up today through Video
            conferencing.

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhanbad-the respondent no.4 to unseal the residential premises of the petitioner which was let out to one Rameshwar Poddar, Branch Manager of Ramel Industries Ltd. under a tenancy agreement and the same was sealed by the order of respondent no.4 in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No.33 of 2013.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of house property situated at Mouza-Govindpur, Mouza No.166, Khata No.202, Plot No.1833 and Khata No.238, Plot No.1832 measuring an area of 700 square feet. The said premises was let out to one Rameshwar Poddar, Branch Manager of Ramel Industries Ltd. to run office. The said Rameshwar Poddar made accused in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No.33 of 2013 on the allegation of running non- banking company in violation of the banking rules. It is further submitted that the said premises was sealed by the order of the respondent no.4. It is also submitted that several accused persons have already been acquitted in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No.33 of 2013 vide judgment dated 27th January, 2017 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. Since the petitioner is not at all concerned with the Govindpur P.S. Case No.33 of 2013, the respondent-authorities cannot keep the said premises under sealed condition for years. The petitioner also filed representation before the respondent no.4 on 2nd August, 2019 requesting inter alia to unseal the said premises, however, no order has been passed by the said respondent which has compelled the petitioner

to prefer the present writ petition. It is further submitted that this Court in a similar case i.e., W.P.(C) No.6305 of 2017 (Dilip Kumar vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.), has already passed an order on 28th November, 2017.

Mr. Ashok Yadav, learned G.A.-I appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, on an application filed by one Dilip Kumar Saw in G.R. Case No.269 of 2013 seeking direction to Govindpur Police for unlocking his premises, observed that the offices of non-banking companies allegedly being run by the accused persons were sealed by the police pursuant to the order of the respondent no.4 and, therefore, the applicant should have approached the said authority for redressal of his grievance. Hence, if the petitioner files a fresh representation before the respondent no.4, the same shall be considered by the said respondent and an appropriate decision will be taken.

In view of the said submission of the learned G.A.-I, let the petitioner file a fresh representation before the respondent no.4 for unsealing of the premises in question. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no.4 shall take appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation.

The writ petition is disposed of.

I.A. No.5101 of 2020 also stands disposed of accordingly.

(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Rohit