SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(CHH) 3821

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 1107 of 2015 Arunraj T. S/o Dhangaswami Aged About 38 Years R/o Yamuna Block A- 4, Door No. 505, National Games Village, Koramangla, P.S. Koramangla District Bengaluru 47 Karnataka.

---- Petitioner Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Pulgaon, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

2. Sanjay Prasad Gupta S/o Shri Raghubar Sao Aged About 38 Years R/o H. No. 302, Block-B, Lotus Aarked, Junwani Road Near Shankaracharya Engineering College, Junwani, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents CRMP No. 1610 of 2017 Vimal Kumar Jaiswal S/o Lallu Prasad, Aged About 36 Years R/o Badariya, Vihar, Near Pani Tanki, Amalidih, Raipur, Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh & Another Through Station House Officer, Police Station Pulgaon, District Durg Chhattisgarh

2. Sanjay Prasad Gupta S/o Shri Raghubar Sao, Aged About 38 Years R/o H. No. 301, Block - B, Lotus Aarked, Junwani Road, Near Shankaracharya, Engineering College, Junwani, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner in CRMP 1107 of 2015 : Mr. Alok Bakshi, Advocate For Petitioner in CRMP 1610 of 2017 : Mr. Deepak Kumar on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Gupta For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Vikram Sharma, Dy. G.A.

For Respondent No. 2 : Ms. Priyanka Mehta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

Order on Board

30.10.2023

1. Heard Mr. Alok Bakshi, learned counsel for the petitioner in CRMP No. 1107 of 2015, Mr. Deepak Kumar, holding the brief of Mr.Jitendra Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner in CRMP No. 1610 of 2017, Mr. Vikram Sharma, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent No.1 and Ms.Priyanka Mehta, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

2. Since both the petitions arise out of same Crime Number, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

3. Both the aforesaid petitions have been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of the charge sheet filed by P.S. Pulgaon, District Durg (C.G.) in Crime No. 363 of 2014 against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 66A and 66D of the Information Technology Act 2000 (for short ‘the IT Act’) and for quashing of the Criminal Case No. 1121/2015 (State of Chhattisgarh Vs. Arun Raj T. and another), pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg, District – Durg (C.G.).

4. Brief facts of the case are that an application under Section 156(3)

Cr.P.C. was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class by respondent No.2, Sanjay Prasad Gupta against two persons namely Naveen Rathore and Ravindra Sharma. In this application, it was stated that on the e-mail address of the complainant one mail was forwarded by the e-mail address of Ravindra Sharma. The original mail was sent to Mr. Motilal Vora (Member of Parliament – Rajya Sabha) who is member of the All India Congress Committee.

The contents of that e-mail reads as under :

“Respected Vora ji, We are very much sorry to write this letter as we came to know that you have wrote a recommendation letter to Union Culture Minister Smt. Chandresh Kumari Katoch for considering the transfer request of Mr. Sanjay Prasad Gupta (SP Gupta) to Raipur, Chhattisgarh. I think in the whole of your political carrier (i.e.since 1972) you have done very big mistake by writing this letter for a fraud staff of ASI. Do you know who is Mr. S.P. Gupta??? He is basically a real estate broker who minted many crore rupees in that business in the past by residing/working in Chhattisgarh. And even he cheated many person including a retired school teacher. There is a fraud land case going on Durg court.

Actually he is on bail.

His immovable property report will tell you the truth of his property detail in Chhattishgarh.

Apart from this during his entire service in ASI he misbehaved with many ladies one best example for that in the year 2007 he mishaved with some lady labour in Uttar Pradesh and we are evidence for all this. We are under the process of getting the evidence it through RTI (copy enclosed).

Do you know why he got transfer from Chhattisgarh to Derhadun? We will tell you the whole story. He very rudely behaved with his boss in Raipur and even manhandled his boss over petty query. Even he got warning memo from his headoffice, Delhi and it was also decided by his headquarter he should never been posted in central india.

Very shamefully he has published many article in his name in different foreign/ Indian journals but those articles are originally written by some famous foreign & Indian authors. For which he was warned by his present office at Derhadun not to do this type activities. He may investigated and convicted soon as per International copy right Act.

He is not chhattihgari as he is originally halling from Bihar and settled year long time back. Throughout his carrier, neither he has not done any good thing for department nor to Chhattisgarh.

In order to restart his real estate business he wants to come back Chhattisgarh and for that reason he approached you.

Sir, pl. with draw your petition that you have send to Hon' culture Minister and do not support for this type of fraud people as it may ruin your reputation from our heart. People of India / people of Chhattisgarh having faith on you and we hope you will keep it up the trust of us for ever”.

5

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top