Raj Kumar Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 3929 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Raj Kumar Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 February, 2024

Author: Vivek Agarwal

Bench: Vivek Agarwal

                                                             1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                      BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                              ON THE 9 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                              WRIT PETITION No. 14942 of 2022

                           BETWEEN:-
                           RAJ KUMAR PRAJAPATI S/O SHRI BABULAL
                           PRAJAPATI, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                           CONSTABLE 502 R/O SHIVPURVA, POST BAHGAU,
                           TAHSIL CHURHAT, POLICE STATION KAMARJI,
                           DISTRICT SIDHI (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI BRIJESH KUMAR CHOUBEY - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                 THE SECRETARY HOME (POLICE) DEPARTMENT
                                 VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (M.P.) (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           2.    DIRECTOR   GENERAL  OF  POLICE, POLICE
                                 HEADQUARTERS JAHANGIRABAD, BHOPAL, M.P.
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, R EWA DISTRICT
                                 REWA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                 This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                           following:
                                                              ORDER

Petitioner's contention is that a chargesheet has been issued by the departmental authorities. It is submitted that the chargesheet dated 20/04/2022 constitutes the same material which is part of Lokayukyta investigation.

Accordingly, two prayers are made in the writ petition namely to quash the impugned chargesheet and secondly issue a mandamus to stay the departmental proceedings in the light of the law laid down in the case of Capt. M Paul Anthony Vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. and another (1999) 3 SCC 679.

As far as the first relief is concerned, no ground is made out to show either issuance of chargesheet without authority or malafide. Therefore, the first relief cannot be granted.

As far as the second relief is concerned, petitioner is given a liberty to move an appropriate application before the Inquiry Officer along with a copy of the judgment and if the Inquiry Officer comes to a conclusion that the evidence

which may be produced by the prosecution or the defence which may be required to be raised by the petitioner may prejudice the criminal case, then keeping in view the provisions contained in the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Capt. M. Paul Anthony (supra), he shall adjourn the proceedings of the departmental enquiry pending finalization of the criminal case.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE vy