1 2025:CGHC:3264 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3893 of 2023 1 - Rajendra Yadav S/o Late Shri B.D. Yadav Aged About 48 Years R/o Hunterwada, Masanganj, Bilaspur, Police - Civil Line, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home/ Police Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Police Station And Post - Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director General of Police (DGP) Police Headquarters (PHQ), Sector -19, Police Station And Post - Rakhi Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Inspector General of Police (IGP) Office Of Inspector General Of Police 32 Bunglow, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 4 - Superintendent of Police (SP) Office of Superintendent Of Police Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Shri Abhishek Pandey, Advocate For State/Respondents : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy. Govt. Advocate Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2025.02.03 18:25:11 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 17/01/2025 1. Brief facts of the case are that since 20.5.2022 the petitioner is posted on the post of Inspector in the police department in Distt. Durg as Incharge of District Special Branch, Bhilai and during his service period, one lady namely Kajal Soni, resident of Devnagar Colony, Amleshwar, Distt. Durg lodged an FIR under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC against the petitioner and after passing of 15 days from the date of registration of the FIR, on 10.5.2023 the Station House Officer, Police Station- Amleshwar, Distt. Durg submitted final report/Challan before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhilai-3 and after passing of near about two months from the date of registration of FIR against the petitioner, on 14.6.2023 respondent No.4/SP, Durg issued charge sheet against the petitioner and initiated departmental enquiry proceedings against him. Since the witnesses in the criminal case and the departmental enquiry proceedings being conducted against the petitioner i.e. prosecutrix namely Kajal Soni and other five witnesses, are one and the same, hence in view of settled legal position the petitioner has filed the instant petition for staying the departmental enquiry proceedings till the prosecutrix and other five prosecution witnesses are examined in the criminal case. 2. Following reliefs have been sought in this petition: “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to produce all the relevant records relating to case of the petitioner before this Hon'ble Court for its kind perusal. (ii) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the departmental enquiry proceedings being conducted against the petitioner 3 till the prosecutrix and other five prosecution witnesses are examined in the criminal case. (iii) That this Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to direct respondents to give suitable compensation to the petitioner for the mental trauma and agony, harassment and hardships suffered by him as also cost of the litigation.” 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner fairly submits that in the instant case the witnesses of the criminal case have already been examined and now there is no impediment in continuation of the departmental inquiry proceedings. 4. In view of the above submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of. The Respondents shall be at liberty to continue the departmental inquiry initiated against the petitioner. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Gopal Singh