Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6996 (GAU)

SRI KAMAL DAS v. THE UNION OF INDIA

I.A.(Civil)/1667/2026 · 2026-05-26

Soumitra Saikia

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010099212026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1667/2026 SRI KAMAL DAS EX-CT/GD, FORCE NO. 115138371, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, SON OF SRI ATUL CHANDRA DAS, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BAMUNBARI, PO- ASSAM SYNTEX, PS- TIHU, DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI, INDIA. 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OFFICE COMPLEX NEW DELHI PIN 110003 3:THE SPECIAL DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE NORTH EAST ZONE P.O.-AMERIGOG GUWAHATI KAMRUP M ASSA PIN 781023. 4:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL NORTH EAST SECTOR Page No.# 2/3 CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE STONY HEAVEN BISHOP COTTON ROAD SHILLONG MEGHALAYA-293001. 5:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL SOUTHERN SECTOR CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE ROAD NO. 10 JUBLEE HILLS NEW MLA/MP COLONY GAYATRI HILLS HYDRABAD TELENGANA PIN500033. 6:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL RANGE CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE KHATAKHATI DIST- KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM. 7:THE COMMANDANT 222 BATTALION CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE NAIMED BIJAPUR CHATTISGAR Advocate for the Petitioner : MS T WAPANGLA, MR. D GOGOI,MR. R DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. S K MEDHI BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 27.05.2026 Heard Ms. T Wapangla, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner. Also heard Mr. SK Medhi, learned CGC for the opposite parties/respondents. 2. By filing this Interlocutory Application the applicant is seeking for Page No.# 3/3 amendment of the payers reflected in the Paragraph-2 of the Interlocutory Application. According to the learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner, the dates were wrongly reflected in the prayer portion of the writ petition and the same are sought to be now corrected and as a consequence this Interlocutory Application has been filed. 3. Mr. SK Medhi, learned CGC for the opposite parties/respondents does not object to the prayer made. 4. Upon perusal of the pleadings made in the Interlocutory Application and, upon hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner, it is seen that the amendment, if allowed, will not change the nature of the present written petition. Therefore, prayer made for amendment is allowed. 5. Accordingly, this IA stands allowed and disposed of. 6. The applicant is permitted to make necessary corrections by filing an amended writ petition before the Registry within a period of 4 (four) weeks from today. Once the amended writ petition is filed, copies thereof shall be served on the respondents. JUDGE Comparing Assistant