1 2025:CGHC:3828-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPPIL No. 11 of 2025 1 - Rajesh Kumar Mishra S/o Late Radhamohan Mishra, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Ward No. 30, C/o Advocate Sohan Lal Chandrapaxi, in Front of Marwadi School, Badhaipara Durg, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Chief Secretary, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 2 – Secretary, Ministry of Women and Child Welfare, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Director General of Police, Police Head Quarter, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Chief Dowry Prohibition Officer (Commissioner / Director), Women and Child Welfare Development, Indravati Bhawan, Block - 01 2nd Floor, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Petitioner in person. For State/Respondents : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate. Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 22-01-2025 Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN 2 1. Heard the petitioner in person. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents. 2. By way of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India styled as ‘Public Interest Litigation’, the petitioner is seeking following reliefs:- “(i) That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records pertaining to the cases under section 498-A of IPC including section 3 & 4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act in which charge-sheet has been filed by the concerned police authorities/Mahila Thana before the concerned learned JMFC. (ii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct/issue appropriate writ/order to the respondent authorities to restrain further filing of charge-sheet under The Dowry Prohibition Act by the concerned police station/Mahila Thana without examination of the cases by the Dowry Prohibition Officer. (iii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct/issue appropriate writ/order to the respondent authorities to constitute recognized welfare institution or organization as per Rule 9 of Chhattisgarh Dowry Prohibition Rules, 2004. (iv) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct/issue appropriate writ/order to the respondent authorities to examine and give detail of all the cases in which any charge-sheet has been filed under The Dowry Prohibition Act without examination by the Dowry Prohibition Officer and the said cases pending before the concerned learned Judicial Magistrate 3 should be quashed with further direction to reinvestigate the cases by the Dowry Prohibition Officer. (v) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct/issue appropriate writ/order to the respondent authorities, if any complaint regarding dowry is being filed before the concerned police station/Mahila Thana then the same should be forwarded to the concerned Dowry Prohibition Officer and the Dowry Prohibition Officer will further examine the cases under Chhattisgarh Dowry Prohibition Rules, 2004. (vi) That, any other relief which the Hon’bel Court deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in the public interest.” 3. It is submitted in the petition that the petitioner is seeking direction to the respondent authorities to comply with the order dated 06- 09-2008 issued by the respondent No.2 whereby respondent No.4 has been appointed as Chief Dowry Prohibition Officer under Rule 6 of the Chhattisgarh Dowry Prohibition Rules, 2004 (in short ‘the Rules, 2004’). It is further submitted that as per Rule 4 of the Rules, 2004 a complaint may be filed by any aggrieved person or a parent or other relatives of such person or by any recognized welfare institution or organization in writing to Dowry Prohibition Officer either in person or through a messenger or by post which clearly reflect that offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act are required to be examined by the Dowry Prohibition Officer and prosecuted by the Dowry Prohibition Officer, but in the State of Chhattisgarh the respondent authorities are not complying the 4 rules framed under Rule 6 of the Rules, 2004 and also not complying the order dated 06-09-2008 which was intimated to all the Departments of State of Chhattisgarh. It is further submitted that as per Rule 10 of the Rules, 2004, Dowry Prohibition Officer shall have the powers of the police officers for the purpose of investigation and submission of report before the competent Magistrate, but the respondent authorities are violating the procedure laid down in Chhattisgarh Dowry Prohibition Rules, 2004 and all the concerned police stations/ Mahila Thana, upon any complaint under the case of dowry directly registered the FIR under Section 498-A of the IPC and at the time of filing of charge- sheet, Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act was also inserted by the concerned police stations without following the rules. He further submitted that on 24-12-2024 the petitioner has given the representation before the respondent authorities with the aforesaid matter, but no action has been initiated by the respondent authorities, copy of representation dated 24-12-2024 along with receipt and track consignment report have been collectively filed as Annexure P-3 and copy of mandatory deposit of Rs.15,000/- as security amount for filing the present WPPIL has also been filed as Annexure-P-4. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that vide order dated 06-09-2008 respondent No.4 has been appointed as Chief Dowry Prohibition Officer under Rule 6 of Rules, 2004 for managing, functioning and for coordination of dowry prohibition 5 cases, but the respondent authorities are not complying the rules framed under Rule 4 of the Rules, 2004 and there are also violation of Rule 10 and other provisions of the Rules, 2004. Therefore, he has filed the present petition seeking aforementioned reliefs. 5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by the petitioner. 6. On being pointed query made from the petitioner, he states that he is facing litigation under Section 498-A of the IPC filed against him by his wife. 7. The Courts should, prima facie, verify the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining a PIL. It is also well settled that the Courts before entertaining the PIL should ensure that the PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury. The Court should also ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation. The Courts should ensure the jurisdiction in public interest is invoked for genuine purposes by persons who have bona fide credentials and who do not seek to espouse or pursue any extraneous object. Otherwise, the jurisdiction in public interest can become a source of misuse by private persons seeking to pursue their own vested interests. 8. As the petitioner has personal interest and he has filed the present PIL with oblique motive, hence, we are not satisfied that 6 this is a genuine petition filed in public interest so as to invoke the jurisdiction in the public interest under Article 226 of the Constitution. 9. Accordingly, the present writ petition styled as Public Interest Litigation is dismissed. Security amount, if any, deposited by the petitioner shall be forfeited. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Aadil