1 2025:CGHC:11853 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1699 of 2025 Jigyasa Chandrakar W/o Ashish Chandrakar Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Chungera, P.S. Balod District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Health, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Mission Director National Health Mission, 3rd Floor, Health Building, Sector-19, North Block, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector District - Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai Chhattisgarh 4 - The Chief Medical And Health Officer District - Khairagarh- Chhuikhadan-Gandai Chhattisgarh 5 - The Block Medical Officer Civil Hospital, Khairagarh, District - Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai Chhattisgarh 6 - Ashish Chandrakar S/o Aman Singh Aged About 40 Years Presently Posted As Registered Medical Assistant (R.M.A.), Primary Health Centre, Pandadah, District - Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate For State/respondents No.1 to 5 : Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate For Respondent No.6 : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.04.15 19:17:51 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 10/03/2025 1. Heard Mr. Ajay Kumrani, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Ajit Singh, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents No.1 to 5 as well as Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for compliance of proposal dated 04.03.2024 sent by respondent No. 3 wherein it has been mentioned that Mr. Ashish Chandrakar, R.M.A. contract NHM posted in Primary Health Center, Pandadah under Civil Hospital Khairagarh is having two wives and three children, as such action is required to be taken against him and he be removed from service. 3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the entire records of the case for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/ direction and direct the respondent No. 2 to take action as per the recommendation dated 3 04.03.2024 sent by the respondent No. 3. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/ direction and direct the respondent No. 2 to 4 to take action against the respondent No. 6 as per the existing rules and law. 10.4 That, any other relief(s) which the Hon'ble Court deems fit & proper may kindly be granted in favor of the petitioner.” 4. Brief facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that, on 14.06.2012, respondent No. 6 got married with the petitioner as per Hindu Rites and Rituals and out of their wedlock, a son was born who is now aged about 8 years. In the month of September 2020, respondent No. 6 got transferred to Pandadah, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai and he left the petitioner at Bhilai and used to visit once in 15 days or a month. It is the case of the petitioner that when she used to ask about his visits, respondent No. 6 used to abuse her using filthy language and thereafter, she came to know about the fact that he has secretly married with some other woman for the second time, from which he has three children and she has obtained the birth certificate of the children from his second wife under Right to Information Act, 2005, in which name of respondent No. 6 is mentioned as their father. Therefore, petitioner has made a complaint before the Collector as well as Police Station. On the basis of above complaint, respondent No. 4 has issued a memo to respondent 4 No. 6 on 24.01.2024 regarding the complaint made by his wife against him and directed him to submit his explanation within a period of 3 days. On 07.02.2024, respondent No. 6 has submitted his reply before respondent No. 4, in w 1965 which he himself has accepted the fact that he is having has two wives and four children three from first wife as well as one from secon1965d wife. On 15.02.2024, respondent No.5 has written a letter/memo to respondent No.4 mentioning that respondent No. 6 himself has accepted of having two wives and in turn, respondent No. 5 has written that the conduct of respondent No. 6 is not in accordance with Rule 22(1) and Rule 21 (4) of Chhattisgarh Civil Services Rules 1965. 5. Thereafter, on 23.02.2024, respondent No.5 has written to respondent No. 4 mentioning that as per comment dated 22.02.2024, respondent No. 4 was directed to take action against respondent No. 6 in accordance with law and further mentioning that conduct of respondent No. 6 should be taken to higher authority i.e. Mission Director. On the very same day i.e. on 23.02.2024, respondent No.4 has informed respondent No.2 regarding the conduct of respondent No. 6 and mentioned that appropriate action is to be taken against respondent No. 6 and respondent No.4 has sent the complaint, reply and all communications to respondent No.2 for further action, on the basis of which, respondent No.3 has conducted District level investigation, in which, certain points were found and vide 5 communication dated 04.03.2024, it has mentioned that the case of the petitioner falls under the category of misconduct against the Civil Services Conduct Rules 1965 as also Chhattisgarh Civil Services Contract Appointment Rules 2012, hence, a recommendation was sent to respondent No.2 for terminating the service of respondent No.6, namely Shri Ashish Chandrakar, R.M.A., Primary Health Centre, Pandadah, District - Khairagarh- Chhuikhadan-Gandai Chhattisgarh. 6. Thereafter, vide show-cause notice dated 15.04.2024, respondent No.2 has written to respondent No.6 informing him that the Collector, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh has recommended the termination of his services and as per point No.34.3 of clause 34 of the Policy 2018, he has given sufficient opportunity of being heard, hence, a show-cause notice was issued and directed the respondent No. 6 to send his explanation within a period of 14 days and if the same is not found to be satisfactory, action will be taken against him. Vide reply dated 29.04.2024, respondent No. 6 has written his explanation to respondent No.2, in which he has denied all the allegations put- forth by the petitioner and submitted that he has married only once in his lifetime, which is completely contradictory to his earlier statement just to escape the situation and in order to keep his services, he is vehemently denying everything and putting false allegations accusing the petitioner of adultery. Further, vide reply dated 22.05.2024, respondent No. 6 has again written letter to 6 respondent No. 2 submitting that he has been married once in his lifetime and he has already submitted an application for divorce so that he should be free from the charges imposed by the Health Department. On the basis of complaint made by the petitioner before the Police Station Balod, First Information Report bearing Crime No.0343/2024 for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A nd 494 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against respondent No. 6 on 27.06.2024. 7. Respondent No. 6 has filed a bail application before this Court, being MCRCA No.882/2024, which was dismissed by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court on 16.08.2024. Thereafter again, respondent No. 6 has filed another bail application before this Court without mentioning that his bail application was dismissed by the Court on 16.08.2024 on merits the said bail application came up for hearing on 10.09.2024, in which, his bail application has been rejected with an exemplary cost of Rs.25,000/-, which shall be deposited by the petitioner within a period of one month in the Registry of this Court falling which, the concerned CJM shall recover the same from the respondent No.6 in accordance with law, holding that in order to mislead this Court, the respondent No.6 has again filed the application to obtain an order in his favour fully knowing that his earlier bail application has been rejected by this Court on 16.08.2024, which amounts playing fraud with the Court. Hence, this Court desired to register a case of perjury against the respondent No.6, but it was informed by the 7 learned State counsel that the respondent No.6 was a Government servant, as such, the Court dropped the proceedings for perjury to be initiated against the petitioner. 8. Thereafter, against the orders dated 16.08.2024 and 10.09.2024, respondent No. 6 has filed a bail application before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which was registered as SLP (Crl.) No.14665- 14666/2024, which was came up for hearing on 04.11.2024, wherein notices were issued and further directed that till the next date of hearing, no coercive measure be taken against the petitioner subject to his cooperation in the ongoing investigation and fixed the matter for further consideration on 10.01.2025. In the meanwhile, the Police has submitted the charge-sheet against respondent No.6 wherein respondent No. 6 has applied for bail under Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the learned Court below, in turn, the learned Court below vide its order dated 05.12.2024 has granted bail to respondent No.6. Thereafter, on 10.01.2025, in the SLP (Crl.) No.14665- 14666/2024, learned counsel for respondent No.6 has not informed the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding the bail granted by respondent No.6 to learned Court below on 05.12.2024 and has taken the order of anticipatory bail on 10.01.2025. 9. The respondent No.6 has filed an application under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court wherein he has made several false allegations against the petitioner without any 8 proof whereas the petitioner has made complaint against respondent No. 6 with all the relevant documents, which shows the conduct of respondent No. 6 is very pathetic. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of the evidence available during the course of the District level investigation, the authorities have found that the petitioner is guilty of bigamy and respondent No.6 was afforded adequate opportunity to defend himself during the course of investigation, but he himself has accepted that he has two wives in his reply dated 07.02.2024. He further submits that on 23.02.2024, respondent No.5 has written to respondent No. 4 mentioning that as per comment dated 22.02.2024, respondent No.4 has directed to take action against respondent No. 6 in accordance with law. It has been contended that the petitioner has submitted reminder representation before the respondent authorities, but till date they have not acted upon the same, hence, the instant petition be allowed and a direction be issued to consider and decide the same within some short span. 11. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 6 have jointly submitted that the petitioner is having no locus standi to file this petition. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the writ petition. 13. From perusal of pleadings of this petition, it seems that the 9 petitioner who happens the wife of respondent No. 6 is making an allegation that respondent No. 6 who is a Government Servant being registered Medical Assistant (R.M.A.) at Primary Heath Centre, Pandadah District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) has illegally contacted second marriage during the substance of first marriage with her and as such, a departmental inquiry is required to be initiated against him and for that, she has made a complaint before the concerned Department. Based upon the said complaint, the Collector, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) has issued a memo dated 04.03.2024 to the Mission Director for taking action aganst respondent No. 6 as it is against the Civil Services Conduct Rules,1965 as also against the Chhattisgarh Civil Services Contract Appointment Rules 2012. The act of respondent No.6 is taken as misconduct and as such, his services may be terminated. 14. According to the petitioner, in spite of aforesaid memo issued by the Collector as also giving relevant evidence in this respect, no action is being taken by the authorities concerned. The Chief Medical and Health Officer District - Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan- Gandai (C.G.) has also issued a show cause notice dated 24.01.2024 to respondent No.6. Since, the petitioner has filed complaint against respondent No.6 and the authorities have also issued notice to respondent No. 6, as such respondents are required to pass appropriate orders for removal 10 of respondent No.6 from his services. 15. From the records, it is reflected that the petitioner/complainant has lodged First Information Report against respondent No.6 for the offence punishable under Sections 494 and 498A of the IPC and the criminal proceedings against respondent No.6 has also been initiated, which is pending before the concerned Court. It is further reflected that respondent No. 6 has facing trial and in the meanwhile, respondent No. 6 has obtained an interim order by Hon’ble Supreme Court in his favour to the effect that no coercive measure is to be taken against petitioner therein (i.e. respondent No.6 herein) subject to co-operation in ongoing investigation. 16. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that the criminal case for the alleged offence under Section 494 of the IPC relates to bigamy is pending for the consideration before the concerned jurisdictional criminal Court and it is yet to be proved whether respondent No.6 has contacted second marriage. Further, the allegation made by the petitioner has been taken into consideration by the concerned Department as such, at this stage only on the basis of complaint made by the petitioner who happens to be the second wife of respondent No.6, the relief as sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. 17. A full fledged trial in the criminal case as well as full fledged inquiry in the Departmental Enquiry is required to be conducted and for that, the concerned authorities have already taken 11 cognizance of the matter. 18. In view of the foregoing reasons, this Court do not find any merit in this case while issuing writ to the concerned authorities for taking action against respondent No.6 as after finalization of the inquiry or final decision on the criminal case, it cannot be held that respondent No.6 has committed offence of bigamy under Sections 494 and 498-A of the IPC. 19. Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition seems to be premature one, that too filed by the complainant/aggrieved wife, which according to respondent No.6 is the second wife and not the first wife. At this stage, it cannot be determined and held that the petitioner can be granted relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before this Court. 20. In the result, the writ petition is found bereft of any merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh