W.P. (Cri.) No. 300 of 2004. Case: Shiv Chandra Prasad Singh Vs The State of Jharkhand and Ors.. Jharkhand High CEGAT & CESTAT High Court
| Case Number | W.P. (Cri.) No. 300 of 2004 |
| Counsel | For Petitioner: Delip Jerath, Adv. and For Respondents: R.R. Mishra, G.P.-II |
| Judges | Amareshwar Sahay, J. |
| Issue | Protection of Human Rights Commission Act (10 of 1994) - Sectons 14, 16 |
| Citation | 2006 CriLJ 4192 |
| Judgement Date | May 02, 2006 |
| Court | Jharkhand High CEGAT & CESTAT High Court |
Order:
-
Heard the parties.
-
In the instant writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 21-6-2002, contained in Annexure-3 to the writ petition, wherein the National Human Rights Commission through its Joint Registrar (Law) requested the Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi by his letter dated 12-7-2002 to institute an F.I.R. against the petitioner in view of the resolution taken by the National Human Rights Commission on 21-6-2002. The following resolutions were taken by the National Human Rights Commission:-
It is indeed painful to see that the then SHO, Sukhdev Nagar Shri Shivchandra Prasad Singh had perpetrated inhuman treatment and torture to the complainant with the sole aim of extortion. A strong action is called for against the delinquent SHO. DGP, Jharkhand is directed to register a case under the appropriate section of IPC against Shri Shivchandra Prasad Singh and get the same investigated by an officer not below the rank of DSP, CBCID.
Further prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition is to quash the First Information Report, which was lodged against him and registered under Sections 341, 323, 504, 379, 161/34 IPC pursuant to the above resolution of the National Human Rights Commission.
-
It appears that one Anant Kumar, Managing Director of Barway Granite and Stone Company Pvt. Ltd., Ranchi submitted an application before the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi alleging therein that on 14-9-1996 at about 4.00 P.M. the petitioner, who was the officer-in-Charge of Sukhdeo Nagar Police Station along with one another Constable came to his factory and, thereafter, started assaulting Kamakhya Singh, an employee of the factory. Thereafter, he abused and man-handled the complainant and one other Director of the factory and he warned and threatened the complainant that if he wants to run the factory then he has to pay Rs. 25,000/- per month to him and he has also to give him a new Maruti Car otherwise he would not allow him to run the factory. When the complainant expressed his inability to meet the demand, he was badly assaulted by the Officer-in-Charge and, thereafter, Rs. 26,000/- was also snatched away from his pocket. Accordingly, the complainant requested the National Human Rights Commission to take stern action against the Officer-in-Charge.
-
From Annexure-3, it appears that in view of the allegations made in the complaint as well as in view of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
WP (C). No. 26027 of 2009 (W). Case: DR. Balagopal 'Indeevaram', P.O. Mangalam, Lekkidi Koottupatha, Palappuram and Ottapalam Vs The Director General of Police, The Superintendent of Police, The Kerala State Human Rights Commission and Sri. P.V. Chandrasekharan. High Court of Kerala (India)
...had placed reliance on a decision of the High Court of Jharkhand in Shiv Chandra Prasad Singh V. State of Jharkhand and others (2006 CriLJ 4192). It is held therein that Section 14(5) and Section 16 of the Act will apply only when the Commission decides to investigate or inquire into allega......
-
WP (C). No. 26027 of 2009 (W). Case: DR. Balagopal 'Indeevaram', P.O. Mangalam, Lekkidi Koottupatha, Palappuram and Ottapalam Vs The Director General of Police, The Superintendent of Police, The Kerala State Human Rights Commission and Sri. P.V. Chandrasekharan. High Court of Kerala (India)
...had placed reliance on a decision of the High Court of Jharkhand in Shiv Chandra Prasad Singh V. State of Jharkhand and others (2006 CriLJ 4192). It is held therein that Section 14(5) and Section 16 of the Act will apply only when the Commission decides to investigate or inquire into allega......