Ziaul Haque vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3924 Jhar

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
        W.P. (PIL) No. 1683 of 2021
Ziaul Haque, Aged about 36 years, S/o- Peshar Ali, R/o- Village-
Majhar Tola, Madhay Narayanpur, Rajmahal, P.O.- Narayanpur, P.S.-
Rajmahal, District-Sahebganj, Jharkhand.
                                                   .... Petitioner
                  -Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Prison & Disaster
   Management, Government of Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, P.O. &
   P.S.- Dhurwa, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand.
3. The Director General of Police, Police House, Dhurwa, P.O. &
   P.S.-Dhurwa, District - Ranchi, Jharkhand.
                                                .... Respondents
                    ---------
CORAM:       SRI SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA, C.J.
             SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

---------

For the Petitioner: Mr. Jitesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C. to A.G.

---------

12/Dated: 12.10.2023

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned counsel for the State, we are of the opinion that there has

been compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in the case of Prakash Singh and Others Vs. Union of India and

Others, (2006) 8 SCC 1. We understand that grievance of the

petitioner at present is that the legislation is not in tune with the

directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, from the

contents of the judgment, it is clear that the directions given by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding constitution of District Level and

State Level Grievance Redressal and Complaints Committee is a

temporary measure till a legislation is brought out. Since the State of

Jharkhand, in the meantime, has promulgated the Jharkhand State

Police Complaint Manual, 2017, in our considered opinion, there is

enough compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court. However, if the petitioner still has any grievance regarding any

provision thereof, it is open for him to prefer a better application under

a separate Public Interest Litigation. For the present, we see no

reason to keep this particular Public Interest Litigation pending, as

there is nothing more to be decided in this case. Hence, this writ

petition is allowed to be withdrawn with the liberty granted to the

petitioner as discussed above.

There shall be no orders as to costs.

Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Urgent Certified copies as per Rules.

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, C.J.)

(Ananda Sen, J.) Manoj/-