2025:CGHC:59905-DB NAFR Digitally signed by JYOTI JYOTI SHARMA SHARMADate:

2025.12.11 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

11:00:47 +0530 WA No. 907 of 2025 Surendra Shrivastava S/o Late Shri Vikram Lal Shrivastava Aged About 64 Years Retired T.I. Saraswati Nagar, Raipur R/o Civil Line Durg Quarter No. 36/95 Tahsil And District Durg C.G.

... Appellant(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department Ministry, Atal Nagar, Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhavan, Ps Rakhi, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

2. Director General Of Police Police Head Quarter, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.)

3. Inspector General Of Police Durg Range, Durg, 31 Bunglow, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s)

For Appellant : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge

10.12.2025

1. The appellant/ writ petitioner has filed this writ appeal assailing the order dated 18.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in WPS No. 6031 of 2019 by which, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition filed by the writ petitioner.

2. The present writ appeal has been filed with the following prayer:-

“It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this writ appeal and to quash order of Single Judge and to quash punishment imposed by respondent no. 1 & 2 imposing punishment of withholding of one cumulative effect”

3. Brief facts of the case are that, on 18-7-2015 at about 22.59 hours in night, one Santosh Chandrakar was murdered in Durg, for which Crime No. 291/2015 for offence under Section 302/34 was registered at PS Mohannagar. The appellant was Investigating Officer of the case. In trial, the accused persons were acquitted of the offence under Section 302 of the IPC by the learned Session Judge, Durg/trial Court, giving them benefit of doubt. Departmental enquiry was conducted against the appellant on the charge that "था(cid:2)ना(cid:2) प्रभा(cid:2)री(cid:7) जै(cid:9)से(cid:11) महत्वपूर्ण(cid:17) (cid:19) एव(cid:21) जिजैम्मदा(cid:11) (cid:2)री पूदा पूरी रीहते(cid:11) हुये(cid:11) था(cid:2)ना(cid:2) म(cid:28)हना नागरी के(cid:11) अपूरी(cid:2)ध क्रम(cid:2)(cid:21)के-291/15 ध(cid:2)री(cid:2) 302, 34 भा(cid:2)दाविव के# ला(cid:2)पूरीव(cid:2)ह(cid:7) पूव(cid:17) के(cid:19) विववच(cid:11) ना(cid:2) केरी आरी(cid:28)विपूये’ के(cid:28) दा(cid:28)षम)क्ति+ते के(cid:2) अवसेरी प्रदा(cid:2)ना केरी अपूना(cid:11) केते(cid:19)व्य के(cid:11) प्रविते उदा(cid:2)से(cid:7)नाते(cid:2) प्रदार्शि/0ते केरी पूलि) लासे री(cid:11)गला) (cid:11)/ना के(cid:11) पूरी(cid:9) (cid:2)-64 के(cid:11) उपू पूरी(cid:9) (cid:2) (02) के(cid:2) उल्लाघ(cid:21) ना केरीना(cid:2)।" In the departmental enquiry, the charge against the appellant was found proved by the Inquiring officer, on the basis of which, the Disciplinary Authority/Inspector General of Police, Durg Range, Durg, imposed penalty of withholding of one increment with cumulative effect dated 3-5-2018. The appeal preferred by the appellant against the order dated 3-5-2018 was also rejected by the respondent No. 2/ Director General of Police, Raipur (CG), vide order dated 16-5-2019 against which, writ petition was preferred by the appellant before learned Single Judge which was also dismissed, thus this appeal.

4. The learned Single Judge has passed the impugned order dated

18.06.2025 and the operative part of the order is reproduced as under:- “ XXX

13. Perusal of the law enunciated by the Apex Court, shows that, unless there is a ground of perversity or finding being contrary to the evidence on record or there being technical flaw in conducting of departmental enquiry or any other grounds, as has been settled by the Apex Court in afore-cited cases, the Court should be slow in interfering with such finding, which are based on evidence brought on record.

14. Reverting to the facts of the case in hand, in instant case, the appella