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

2024 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 16221

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
M/s CHEEMA LOCAL CARRIER CONSTRUCTION – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
CRMP/855/2021



NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 855 of 2021 M/s Cheema Local Carrier Construction, a Partnership Firm, through its partner Gurmukh Singh S/o Gurucharan Singh, aged about 50 years, R/o Goyal Complex, in front of Minacha Petrol Pump, G.E. Road, Telibandha, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner Versus

1. The State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Superintendent of Police Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. The Station House Officer Police Station Pandri, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Suryakant Tiwari S/o Late Shashi Bhushan Tiwari, aged about 44 years R/o I - 34, Anupam Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

5. M/s Ganga Constructions Maharaja Apartment, B -1, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, through its partner Suryakant Tiwari S/o Late Shashi Bhushan Tiwari, aged about 44 years, R/o I - 34, Anupam Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Aman Memon, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. A. G.

For Respondent No.4 : None appears though served Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

24.07 .2024

1. Heard Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Aman Memon, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State/ respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

2. None appears on behalf of respondent Nos.4 & 5 though served.

As per office report dated 10.07.2024, notice has been served upon respondent No.4 and so far as respondent No.5 is concerned, it is stated to be unserved, but from perusal of array of parties, it transpires that the respondent No.4 is the partner of respondent No.5 i.e., M/s Ganga Constructions, Maharaja Apartment, B-1, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, hence, the notice served upon respondent No.4 be deemed as also served upon respondent No.5.

3. In compliance of the Court’s order dated 12.07.2024, an additional affidavit has been filed by the Additional Superintendent of Police / City Superintendent of Police, Civil Lines, Raipur, which is taken on record, whereby it has been informed that 12 erring officials, who have shown the laxity in keeping the investigation of the present pending since 20.07.2017, action have been taken against them by the competent authority out of which against 02 officials, a joint departmental enquiry has been initiated and charge-sheet has been issued to them; against 07 officials, a penalty of Rs. 1,000/- each has been imposed by the Inspector General of Police, Range Raipur and against 02 officials, punishment of displeasure has been recorded against them and 01 official has already been retired, therefore, a request has been made to the Inspector General of Police, Range Raipur to obtain necessary permission for action to be taken against him from the competent authority.

4. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of First Information Report dated 20.09.2017 (Annexure-P/1) registered at Police Station, Pandri, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) bearing Crime No. 278/2017 for the offence under Section 420, 34 of IPC.

5. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is proprietor of M/s Cheema Local Carrier Construction, which is a proprietorship firm engaged in business of supply and transporting of building materials and the respondent No.4 is the partner of the respondent No.5, which is also a partnership firm. The complainant i.e. respondent Nos. 4 & 5 have purchased building materials from the petitioner and the petitioner has also transported building materials to the respondent No.4 & 5 through his transport vehicle as such total amounting Rs. 7,00,000/- is outstandi

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top