2026:JHHC:19628 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 4014 of 2026 Raju Kumar aged about 35 year son of late Yogendra Ram resident of village-Kasmar, P.O. & P.S.-Pratappur, District-Chatra, Jharkhand. ... … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Home Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. The Director General of Police, Jharkhand, DRPD Bhawan, HEC, P.O. & P.S.-Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. The Inspector General of Police (Human Rights), Jharkhand, Ranchi, P.O. & P.S.- Dhurwa, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. The Inspector General of Police, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribag, P.O., P.S. & District- Hazaribag, Jharkhand 5. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribag, P.O., P.S. & District- Hazaribag, Jharkhand 6. The Superintendent of Police, Hazaribag, P.O., P.S. District- Hazaribag, Jharkhand. ... … Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Baleshwar Yadav, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. Ruchi Mukti, AC to AAG-IA -------- Order No. 2 /Dated: 3rd July 2026 The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for the following reliefs: “1.i. For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing and commanding upon the respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner for the conferment of the Gallantry Award for his participation in the encounter dated 12.01.2015 vide Chouparan P.S. Case No. 11/2015 (Annexure-2), on par with the other team members who have already been awarded but his name has not been recommended for Gallantry Award. ii. For issuance of an appropriate writ(a), order(s), direction(s) or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to produce entire relevant records pertaining to the recommendation, evaluation, and award process for the said encounter, for perusal by this Hon'ble Court and to determine why the Petitioner's name was excluded or overlooked despite being part of the same operational team. And/or iii. For issuance of such other writ(s), order(s), direction(s) as Your 2026:JHHC:19628 2 Lordships may deem fit and proper for doing conscionable justice to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has aggressively participated in the encounter dated 12.01.2015 vide Chouparan PS Case No. 11 of 2015 in which three Maoist were killed and no casualty took place in the side of police parties. He submits that for this brave participation in the encounter, four police personnels were awarded with Gallantry Award but the petitioner has not been awarded with the same. Accordingly, he submits that this writ application may be disposed of by directing the petitioner to approach the concerned respondent for redressal of his grievance. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that since no counter affidavit has been filed, as such the petitioner may approach the concerned respondent for redressal of his grievance. 4. Having regard to the above, the instant writ application is disposed of by directing the petitioner to approach the 6th Respondent by filing a fresh representation along with all documents relied upon by him. The moment the 6th Respondent receives such representation he, after verification of the record, shall pass an order with regard to the claim made by the petitioner in this writ application in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. 5. It goes without saying that if the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, necessary consequential order be issued within a further period of two weeks. 6. Pending I.A, if any, also stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 3rd July 2026 Amit Uploaded on 9/7/2026