1 2025:CGHC:18793-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 231 of 2025 1 - Kailash Kumar Pandey S/o Late Gajanand Pandey Aged About 39 Years R/o Ward No. 19 Jagriti Chowk Bagdehipara, P.S. and Tahsil- Gobra Nawapara District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Affairs Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay Atal Nagar Naya Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director General of Police Police Head Quarter, Sector-19, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Superintendent of Police Raipur District Raipur C.G. 4 - Station House Officer Police Station Khamhardih, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Operation Head M/s All Services Global Private Limited, Registered Office At Plot No. AG-3, Cama Industrial Estate Opp. Kusum Masala Near HUB, Goregoan East Mumbai- 400063, CG Branch At Jaggi House Rajiv Nagar Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Nagender Singh State Head, M/s All Services Global Private Limited, CG Branch At Jaggi House Rajiv Nagar Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 7 - V.K. Rai Operation Head, M/s All Services Global Private Limited, CG Branch At Jaggi House Rajiv Nagar Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 8 - Dilip Kumar Yadav Zone Manager, M/s All Services Global Private Limited, CG Branch At Jaggi House Rajiv Nagar Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 9 - Chetan Dubey Sub Inspector, Police Station Khamhardih, Through Superintendent of Police Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.04.26 11:44:54 +0530 2 10 - Managing Director CSMCL, 4th Floor Aabkari Bhavan Chhokra Nala Labhandi Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 492001 ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 25.04.2025 1. Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the Petitioner. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Kailash Kumar Pandey with a prayer to direct the respondent No.2 DGP to enquire the matter as per Criminal and Service rules/applicable rules and take an appropriate legal or necessary action against the concern respondents and the further prayer is made to direct the respondents concerned to provide necessary security to the petitioner. 3. Relevant facts for disposal of this petition are that on 14.10.2024, the petitioner has been initially appointed to the post of District 3 Representative under the Surajpur District, the work of petitioner has been distributed as coordination with Excise Office / liquor shops manpower, monthly inspection report, regular valuation, monthly sale report, bank deposit report, appointment removal of employees on temporary basis, attendance of employees. Accordingly the said appointment order, the petitioner has joined the service on 21.10.2024 but the proper documentary charge was not handed over to the petitioner and on 07.12.2024 the respondent no. 5 has directed to one Neeraj Kumar Pandey who was ex-District Representative to hand over the charge to the petitioner. On 03.01.2025 when the excise team has made raid to one English Wine Shop at Pratappur District Surajpur, then they found for adulterated liquor and arrested the involved salesman of said shop. On the basis of said raid, a show-cause notice issued by the respondent no. 7 towards the petitioner on 04.01.2025, on being receiving the said show-cause notice, the petitioner has duly submitted reply before the respondent no. 7 on 17.01.2025. But there is no conclusion ever been made by either of respondent no. 5 or by the respondent no. 7 and is still pending. 4. Thereafter on 22.01.2025 District Manager of the office of respondent no. 10 has issued the letter towards the petitioner and directed to deposit the damages/loss amount of Rs. 16,66,720/- from concerning Chief Seller and other seller and to take appropriate legal proceeding against them. On being instruction of 4 respondent no. 7, the petitioner has made complaint before the Station House Officer, Pratappur District - Surajpur on same day. That, out of the blue, the respondent no. 8 has by illegal and arbitrary manner, blackmail, pressurized, extorted and threatened the petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs. 8,00,000/-, though the petitioner after arranged the fund, paid the said amount on 30.01.2025 and thereafter the petitioner has resign his services and since from November 2024 to February, the respondent no. 8 with collusion of respondent no. 5 to 7 has extorted the money from petitioner about of Rs. 11,53,000/-. That, on 26.03.2025, the respondent no. 9 called the petitioner to come out at Police Station and when the petitioner has appeared before the respondent no. 9, he illegally wrote undertaking letter from petitioner, then the petitioner has made complaint against the respondent no. 9 on 02.04.2025 with regard to the blackmailing, torture, illegal threatened, extortion committed made by the respondent no. 6 to 8 by use of solder of respondent No. 9. 5. It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has moved a complaint (Annexure P/11) before the Superintendent of Police, Raipur i.e. Respondent No.3 herein, but he is not taking cognizance on his complaint and states that the police is involved in the matter, therefore, he has come before this Court. 5 6. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that the grievance of the petitioner can be very well redressed before the Court below by filing an application under Section 156 (3) or 200 Cr.P.C. (now under Section 175(3) or under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). He further submits that the controversy involved in the present matter has already been decided by the High Court of Allahabad in Misc. Bench No.24492 of 2020 : Waseem Haider Vs. State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home Others vide judgment and order dated 14.12.2020 as well as by this Court in WPCR No.333 of 2020 (Akhilesh Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), decided on 12.04.2023, dismissing the said petition, hence, the present petition be also dismissed in terms of the said order. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy before appropriate Forum. Sd/- SD/- SD/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Ashu