1 2025:CGHC:22848-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1325 of 2025 1 - Komal Prasad Sahu S/o Bhudev Prasad Sahu Aged About 52 Years R/o Chiranjivi Das- Nagar, P.S.- Chakradhar-Nagar, Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Superintendent Of Police- Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Station House Officer Police Station- Chakradhar Nagar, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, C.G. 3 - Ramprasad Sidar S/o Uttam Prasad Sidar Aged About 47 Years R/o Village- Balamgoda, Block And District Raigarh C.G. Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kumar Vissayakam Gupta, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 10/06/2025 1. Learned counsel for the State submits that in compliance of this Court’s RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.06.10 17:57:33 +0530 2 Order dated 30/04/2025, an affidavit of Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh has been filed and an explanation from the concerned superintendent of Police, District Raigarh has been called. 2. The relevant part of the affidavit from paragraph 3 on wards is reproduced hereunder:- “3. That, in compliance of the Hon'ble Court's order dated 30.04.2025, it is most humbly and respectfully submitted that, the office of the Deponent has issued a letter to the concerned Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur Range. District Bilaspur seeking explanation from the concerned Superintendent of Police, District Raigarh with regard to the observation made by this Hon'ble Court vide its order dated 30.04.2025. Copy of the letter dated 05.05.2025, is being annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R/1 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 4. That, thereafter, in compliance of the aforesaid instruction letter dated 05.05.2025, the office of the Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur Range, District Bilaspur has called an explanation from the concerned Superintendent of Police, District Raigarh with regard to the observation made by this Hon'ble Court vide its order dated 30.04.2025 as to under which provision of law, he had expressed displeasure without taking any action against the erring officials. Copy of the letter dated 10.05.2025, is being annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R/2 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 5. That, in compliance of the aforesaid letter dated 10.05.2025, the office of the Superintendent of Police, District Raigarh has submitted his explanation before the office of the Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur Range, District Bilaspur explaining the expression of 'displeasure' that, the expression of 'displeasure' is made part of the service record of the concerned employee. Further, on the basis of the said expression, grading is recorded in the ACR, which ultimately affects the service record of the concerned employee. It is further submitted by the concerned Superintendent of Police, Raigarh that, since the provision of appointment and punishment of DySP Level Officers is under the jurisdiction of the State Government, therefore, keeping in view, dissatisfaction has been expressed on the negligence of the guilty officers towards their official duties. It is also made clear that, the dissatisfaction received by the gazetted officers will determine their grading while writing their annual confidential report (ACR) 3 which affects the service record. Thereafter, the office of the Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur Range, District Bilaspur has forwarded the same before the office of the Deponent on 03.06.2025. Copies of the forwarding letter dated 03.06.2025 alongwith the copy of the explanation dated 31.05.2025, submitted by the Superintendent of Police, District Raigarh, are being annexed collectively herewith as ANNEXURE R/3 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 6. That, the Clause 213 of the Chhattisgarh Police Regulations provides that, all India Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1955 and Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, would be applicable in respect of officials working under Indian Police Services and State Police Services respectively with regard to punishment and appeals. Clauses 214, 214, 216 and 217 provide for various kinds of punishments that can be imposed on other officials working in Police. The Clause 10 of the CCA Rules provides for two kinds of punishments that can be imposed on the personnel of the State Police Services, they are minor penalties and major penalties. Amongst minor penalties, the punishment that can be imposed on the personnel of the State Police Services i.e. Censure, these rules provide for the entire procedures to be adopted for imposing various punishments. 7. That, the displeasure is not a form of punishment as provided under these rules. The expression of displeasure has its consequential affect on the services of the incumbent as mentioned above. 8. That, the Deponent herein is bound to adhere and comply with the direction issued by this Hon'ble Court from time to time and it shall be his most sincere endeavour to ensure implement action with the coordination of the Police Officials as early as possible. 9. That, the Deponent has highest regards to the orders and directions passed by the Hon'ble Court from time to time and as and when, any further direction be made by the Hon'ble Court, the same will be complied with in its true spirit. 3. Learned counsel for the State also submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the instant case, as such, this CRMP may be disposed of. 4. In view of the above submission, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the instant CRMP with liberty to take appropriate recourse available under the law. 4 5. In that view of the matter, the CRMP is disposed of as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty granted in favour of the petitioner. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Amardeep/ Rahul