1 2026:CGHC:2396 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 63 of 2026 1 - Rahul Tiwari S/o Shri Surendra Tiwari Aged About 53 Years Occupation- Inspector, Incharge Police Control Room, Bilaspur, R/o A-124, Agyeya Nagar, Vyapar Vihar Road, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home/police, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya Police Station And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Inspector General Of Police Raipur Range, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Sr. Superintendent Of Police Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Sr. Superintendent Of Police Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - City Superintendent Of Police City Kotwali, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Enquiry Officer Additional Superintendent Of Police (West), Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 7 - Dy. Superintendent Of Police Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Dy. Government Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 2 15/0 1/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records concerning the case of the petitioner from the possession of the respondent authorities for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to supply the documents sought for by the petitioner without delay and conclude the departmental enquiry in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may also kindly be pleased to grant any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case to the petitioner including cost fo the petition.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is holding the post of Inspector and while he was posted as the Incharge of the Police Station Moudhapara, District – Raipur, he investigated the Crime bearing Crime No. 107/2019 for the alleged commission of offence under Section 384, 507, 120B, 389, 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 & Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 3. Subsequently, on the basis of the complaint made, the police authorities initiated enquiry proceedings against the petitioner and have issued, charge-memo dated 08.01.2025 (Annexure P/1) framing charge that, the petitioner has committed negligence while investigating the aforementioned crime and thereby, has acted in violation of the Regulation 64 (2) and 64 (4) of the Police Regulation. Petitioner was served with the documents enclosed along with the charge-sheet, however, as the allegation against the petitioner is that, he being the Investigating Officer was negligent in conducting the investigation and therefore, to take appropriate defence, he has submitted an application dated 15.05.2025 (Annexure P/3) to the Respondent No. 3 seeking the documents with regard to the crime investigated by him forming part of 3 the case-diary as also, the instructions issued by the superior authority with regard to the criminal case registered and investigated by him. 4. He submits that the application was filed on 15.05.2025, however, till date, the documents as asked for by the petitioner was not supplied and no decision has been taken with his application and therefore, direction be issued to the respondent authorities to take decision on the application and supply the documents to the petitioner as sought for. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State raises an objection and submits that as the petitioner is praying for decision to be taken on the application (Annexure P/3) submitted by him before the Respondent No. 3, the application will be considered in accordance with law and the documents which can be provided to the petitioner will be provided. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner being a Police Officer and posted as Incharge, Police Station – Moudhapara, had investigated the crime bearing Crime No. 107/2019. He was served with the charge-memo alleging that the petitioner was negligent in investigating the crime. Petitioner has submitted an application seeking the documents forming part in the case-diary of the Crime No. 107/2019 which he investigated and there is allegation against on him that he has not conducted proper investigation and was negligent. 8. In the aforementioned facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of at this stage directing the respondent authorities to decide the application submitted by the petitioner dated 15.05.2025 (Annexure P/3) making a prayer for supply of the relevant documents as mentioned therein within a period of 02 weeks and to supply the documents as prayed for and if for 4 any reason, any of the document as prayed could not be supplied, then a reasoned order should be passed in this regard. Further, considering that the charge-memo was issued on 08.01.2025, the respondent authorities are directed to conclude the proceedings at the earliest without any further delay, after taking decision on the application submitted by the petitioner, subject to cooperation of the petitioner. 9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY Date: 2026.01.20 11:04:33 +0530