1 2025:CGHC:21712-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP(CR) No. 247 of 2025 Sanjay Kumar Gupta (petitioner in person) S/o Bishmber Dayal Gupta (B.D. Gupta), Aged About 46 Years Current Resident F403 Raheja Residency Avanti Vihar Raipur C.G. - 492001 Permanent Resident Gupta and Company Main Road Dalli Rajhara Balod (C.G.) Email sanboxe@gmail.com Mobil 9406409579 ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Collector Raipur, Collectorate Office Nagar Ghadi Chowk Raipur Chhattisgarh – 492001 2 - M/s Laxmi LPG Gas Agency Through Proprietor Sanjay Yadav Next To Holy Cross School Byron Bazar Raipur (C.G.) (Mobile No. 9425230240, 7000796804) 3 - Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) Through Regional Manager (LPG) Raipur CRC Office 1st Floor Saheed Vir Narayan Singh Complex Nagar Ghaadi Chowk Raipur (C.G.) - 492001 Phone 07712237515, 7831939330 4 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police Raipur Collectorate Raipur Nagar Ghadi Chowk Raipur Chhattisgarh - 492001 5 - Station House Officer Police Station- Kotwali Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492001 --- Respondents (Cause title is taken from the CIS) VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.05.12 11:04:13 +0530 2 For Petitioner-in-person : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Gupta For State-Respondent : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 08.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Gupta, petitioner-in-person and Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned Dy. Government Advocate, appearing for the State-respondent. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following relief(s): “10.1 That, Respondents Public servant committed the criminal misconduct in the discharge of their duty, are much learned and have knowledge of the consequences of such criminal misconduct should be prosecuted and convicted with the strongest punishment at law. 10.2 That, respondents are Public servant posted on the top offices of a government organisation having influence to manage any enquiry or investigation against them, therefore petitioner prays for his safety 3 that if petitioner open this scam and people get aware of asking refund of home delivery charges if home delivery is not provided to them, may stop rupees 2-3 lakh earning of every LPG distributor and nexus of LPG gas distributors LPG gas companies officials police get exposed. May direct respondent no. 2 & 3 to pay refund of home delivery charges of 13 years with compensation to him for transport and mental harassment. Also direct LPG gas providing companies to take necessary step for spreading awareness regarding home delivery charges and refund of such charges if home delivery is provided not to them, also there should be provision to take action against agencies violating public safety by giving LPG gas cylinder in public place or take make transport of such LPG gas cylinder by them or by customer without safety measure. Such like petrol pump is been banned to sell petrol in can's or bottles. 10.3 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly issue direction, or may kindly be pleased to grant any other ancillary relief by issuing any other suitable writ, direction or order, deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of petition” 4 3. Brief facts of this case are that the petitioner has been filed a complaint case against respondents No.2 & 3 under Section 200 Criminal Procedure Code in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur on date 02.01.2024 with a prayer for strict action against the respondents for criminal conspiracy against him and refund of home delivery charges for rest 13 years with compensations for harassments to be provided to him from respondents, and Court may be taken suo moto under Article 32 & Article 226 of the Constitution, this crime of respondents in cognizance, and further may kindly be pleased to grant any other ancillary relief by issuing any other suitable direction or order, deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of the application/petition. 4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the State would submit that as per instructions received by him, the statement of respondents No.2 and 3 could not be recorded as Sanjay Yadaw was bedridden and stated that the same would be recorded within a week from today. He also assured that the police report would be submitted before the concerned Magistrate within a period of two weeks from today. 5. In view of the assurance given by the learned State counsel that the police report would be submitted before the concerned Magistrate within two weeks from today, it is directed that on such report being filed before the concerned Magistrate, the Magistrate is directed to 5 consider the same and proceed in accordance with law. 6. In view of the above, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Vasant