Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.07.23 14:49:27 +0530 2025:CGHC:34843-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 398 of 2025 1 - Jatin Ganjeer S/o Prakash Ganjeer Aged About 28 Years R/o Santoshi Nagar, Kathadih Boriyakhurd Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Wasim Akram Khan S/o Sheikh Sultan Khan Aged About 32 Years R/o House No. 23/248, New Basti, Raja Talab Raipur, Tahsil And District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Mohan Rao Gouri S/o Shri Gopal Rao Gouri Aged About 38 Years R/o House No. 26/820, Ward No. 24 Amar Chowk, Raja Talab Raipur, Tahsil And District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Suraj Kumar Rajput S/o Dhanraj Singh Rajput Aged About 29 Years R/o 129, Ward No. 08, Patel Para, Village - Sirsida, Tahsil - Charam, District - Kanker Chhattisgarh At Present R/o Near Santoshi Temple, Vidhansabha Road, Aamasivni Raipur, Tahsil And District - Raipur Chhattisgarh versus Petitioner(s) 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home/ Police, Mahanadi, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Director General Of Police Police Head Quarter Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent Of Police Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Station House Officer Police Station - Moudhapara, District - Durg Chhattisgarh 5 - Tahsin Jaidi S/o Late R.H. Jaidi Aged About 49 Years Reporter - Ibc 24 News Channel, R/o Ashok Ratan, Police Station - Pandri, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 6 - Shivam Mishra S/o Suryamani Mishra Aged About 27 Years Reporter News Channnel Lalluram.Com, R/o Agrasen Chowk Raipur, Police Station - Azad Chowk Tahsil And District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 7 - Divya Sharma Sub Inspector Police Station Kotwali, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 8 - Yaman Dewangan Thana Incharge Moudhapara, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 9 - Lakhan Patle Additional Superintendent Of Police Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 10 - Kesari Nandan Naik City Superintendent Of Police, Kotwali Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mrs. Fouzia Mirza, Senior Advocate along with
Legal Reasoning
paragraphs, it is thus crystal clear that, prima facie cognizable offence is made out against the present accused petitioners and after due investigation, the charge sheet would be filed against the accused petitioners before the concerned Jurisdictional Court in accordance with law and there is no infirmity or illegality in the same. 13. It is humbly submitted that, the impugned criminal proceedings initiated by the police authority is properly directed and on sound reasons, therefore, there is no illegality or infirmity on the part of the Answering Respondents police authority, thus, the instant writ petition filed by the petitioners are baseless and devoid of merits, thus, deserves to be dismissed at the threshold. 14. Thus, the allegations made by the petitioners regarding harassment, illegal detention and inaction are baseless and misconceived and denied in toto. All the actions of the Answering Respondents Police Authorities have been in accordance with due 10 process of law. However, the investigation is ongoing and being carried out fairly, impartially and in accordance with law. The present petitioners are trying to interfere with the due course of law by approaching this Hon'ble Court prematurely, as the Police authorities have acted strictly within the bounds of law and as per the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Hon'ble Court from time to time. No violation of fundamental rights as alleged by the present petitioners in the petition, has occurred.” 6. Learned Advocate General appearing for the State would submit that in fact the petitioners abused the press reporters and also threatened them with dire consequences by showing the pistol. He would submit that as far as taking the petitioners to the Court by parading on the public road is concerned, due to technical fault in the govt. vehicle near Jaistham Chowk, an alternative vehicle was demanded, which fact can be seen from the Rojnamcha Sanha and the mechanic bill of the concerned vehicle. He would submit that looking to the safety of the accused persons and looking to the fact that the Court is situated at a short distance, the accused persons were being taken to the court on foot wearing handcuffed for safety. As far as the alleged atrocities committed towards the accused persons is concerned, they have not made a single complaint in this regard before the concerned Magistrate at the time of passing of order of judicial remand. In fact, they were produced before the Magistrate after conducting the proper medical examination. The petitioner No. 2 abused the complainant with obscene language and also threatened them without any rhyme and reason. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings. 8. Bare perusal of the above, it is evident that while the complainant/press 11 reporters entered into the premises of the Mekahara Hospital for collecting the news/snaps, the security personnel/the petitioner objected the said act of the press reporter and in that process some hot talks and scuffled took place between them and thereafter, the press reporter lodged the report and in the meanwhile, the petitioner No.2 who is the In-charge of security guard of Mekahara Hospital came to the place of incident and by showing the pistol towards the press reporters abused and threatened the press reporters with dire consequences. 9. From the submission made by the learned Advocate General, it is crystal clear that in respect of the alleged atrocities committed towards the petitioner, though the father of petitioner no. 1 approached the higher authorities of the police, nothing has been stated against the police personnel and even the petitioners never tried to approach the competent jurisdictional court by moving an application under Section 175(3) in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. 10. Ergo, the present petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioners to approach before the appropriate forum for redressal of their grievance. 11. Be that as it may, the guards, who are performing their duties in the hospital premises, are expected to deal with any member of public politely and also expected that they could not utter any unparliamentary language and should try to their best to settle the issue amicably. In the same manner, it is also expected that the press reporters who are 12 functioning for the good cause of the society should also follow the guidelines/rules which have been framed by the Govt. for the betterment of the public at large and to maintain the privacy of the patient and their relatives. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Rahul/Gowri
Arguments
Mr. Ali Afzal Mirza, Advocate For State : Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Advocate General along with Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 22/07/2025 1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:- RELIEFS (S) SOUGHT :- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record concerning the case of the petitioners 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 State to pay a compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/-to each 3 petitioner for the gross violation of their fundamental rights under Articles 21, 14 & 19 of the Constitution of India. 10.3 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct initiation of appropriate disciplinary and criminal proceedings against the erring police officials i.e. respondent no. 7 to 10 responsible for the acts of custodial torture, public humiliation, and illegal detention. 10.4 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to issue a public apology for the unlawful actions and harassment suffered by the petitioners and their families. 10.5 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to restore and return all seized personal items and digital property belonging to the petitioners. 10.6 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant appropriate compensation and reparation for the petitioner's loss of employment, mental anguish and irreparable harm to their reputation. 10.7 Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit or proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Facts of the case in the nutshell are that complainant no. 5 is a news reporter at IBC 24 News Channel. On 25.05.2025 (i.e. date of incident) at around 8:30 P.M., complainant no. 5 along with his camera man went to Mekahara Hospital, Raipur to report an incident that occurred at the Police Station Urla. Subsequently, complainant no. 5 was stopped from entering the Hospital premises by a security guard i.e. petitioner no. 1, who was working at the said hospital. When complainant no. 5 told the security guard to speak with the Superintendent, but the guard refused to 4 do so, and started abusing and pushing the complainant no. 5 by placing his hand on his chest, due to which the complainant no. 5 got injured, the complainant no. 5 informed the said incident to the Superintendent and other reporters. After the incident took place on 25.05.2025 the complainant no. 5 submitted a written application before Station House Officer Police Station Moudhapara, District Raipur (C.G.) informing the occurrence of the incident and Marpeet being done by the petitioner. On the basis of the written application made by the complainant no. 5 on 26.05.2025, FIR bearing Crime No. 80/2025 was lodged against the petitioner no. 1 for the offence U/s 115(2), 296 of the BNS, 2023 and the matter was taken under investigation. Thereafter, petitioner no. 2 who was the security Incharge has been called by the complainant, however, he came to the place of the incident after some time as he was performing the last rites (Chehullum Fatiha) of his close relatives. According to the petitioners, when the petitioner No.2 came and tried to resolve the dispute with the complainants, but despite that the complainants as were not allowed to go inside the hospital and take photograph being annoyed assaulted the petitioners, on the gate of Mekahara and went to the police Station for lodging an FIR out of personal vendetta and oblique motive. According to the petitioners, on the complaint of respondent no. 6 offence was registered under section 115(2), 126(2), 296, 3(5) and 351(2) of the BNS 2023, along with section 25, 27 of the Arms Act against all the petitioners with the allegation that the complaint no. 6 works at the Online Platform lalluram.com as a reporter, the complainant no. 6 on 5 25.05.2025 an information was received on the press reporters WhatsApp group about the incident that occurred with reporter Tehsin Zaidi, who went to report the incident that occurred at Police Station Urla, who went to Mekahara Hospital to cover the incident where a guard and others committed Marpeet with him. The complaint reached the hospital with his fellow reporter, Siddarth Dev Sri Nivas, Suman Pandey, Deepak Shukla, Avinash Chandravanshi and Mohit Singh Sanger. The complainant no. 6 saw that the reporter Tehsin Zaidi sitting with the co-accused Jatin who worked at Mekahara Hospital as a security guard along with police officials. A reporter who came along with the complainant no. 6 told that co-accused person to apologize as he has pushed a reporter and the matter will get resolved here itself, but the co-accused Jatin started abusing the reporter, and threatened him with dire consequences and started committing Marpeet with him. Thereafter, in order to save themselves, the reporters and the complainant no. 6 rushed outside where petitioners obstructed their way and unanimously started abusing them. Thereafter petitioner no. 2 aimed his pistol at the complainant no. 6 and threatened him to life and the other accused persons and he also committed Marpeet with the complainant no. 6 and others. Thus, this petition. 3. Learned counsel would submit that the petitioners are aggrieved by the unlawful, arbitrary and unconstitutional action of the police authorities dated 26/05/2025, whereby they handcuffed the petitioners without recording any reason of necessity in contravention of established legal guidelines and physically assaulted the petitioners while in custody and 6 shaved the heads and beards of the petitioners in custody in d-grading fashion and circulated their photographs in the social media and further paraded the petitioners on public road from Jaistham Chowk to the Court humiliating them, physically and mentally assaulting them in public view. 4. Vide order dated 15/07/2025, this Court directed the Superintendent of Police, Raipur/Respondent No.3 to file his personal affidavit with regard to the subject matter. 5. In compliance of the order of this Court, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Raipur filed his affidavit on 21/07/2025 stating as under:- “3. That, in compliance of the Hon'ble Court's direction dated 15.07.2025, it is most humbly and respectfully submitted that, the present petitioners namely Jatin Ganjeer, Wasim Akram Khan, Mohan Rao Gouri and Suraj Kumar Rajput are the accused in Crime No. 81/2025, registered on 26.05.2025 at Police Station Moudhapara, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115 (2), 351 (2), 126 (2) and 3 (5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The petitioners were earlier employed as Private Security Personnel at Mekahara Hospital, Raipur through an outsourced Agency. 4. That, in this regard, it is humbly submitted that, the aforesaid offence has been registered against the present petitioners for the reasons that, they abused and threatened to kill the Press Personnel at Mekahara Hospital Campus by showing a Pistol, therefore, they were arrested on the same day. 5. That, after the arrest, the accused persons were being taken to the concerned Jurisdictional Court in a Government Vehicle, but due to a technical fault in the said Government Vehicle near 7 Jai Stambh Chowk, an alternative vehicle was demanded, which is evident from the Roznamcha Sanha and Mechanic Bill of the concerned Government Vehicle. Copy of the Roznamcha Sanha and Mechanic Bill of the concerned Government Vehicle, are being annexed collectively herewith as ANNEXURE R/1 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. For the safety of the arrested accused and due to the short distance to the concerned Court, the accused persons were being taken to the Court on foot wearing handcuffs for safety. 6. That, the accused persons were medically examined in the same conditions in which, they were taken into custody and were presented before the concerned Jurisdictional Court for judicial remand. Even when the Court interrogated the accused persons during the judicial remand, no complaint whatsoever was made by any of the accused persons against the concerned Police before the concerned Court below, which is evident from the order-sheet of the concerned Jurisdictional Court. Copy of the order-sheet of the concerned Jurisdictional Court, is being annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R/2 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. Copy of the MLC reports of the accused persons, are being annexed collectively herewith as ANNEXURE R/3 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court, which clearly indicates the fact that, there is no injury found on the bodies of the accused persons. 7. That, a complaint letter has been received by registered post from one Shri Prakash Ganjeer, father of the accused Jatin Ganjeer in which, there is no mention of any misconduct by the Police, but it is related to filing of counter FIR against the applicant. Copy of the complaint letter, made by one Shri Prakash Ganjeer, father of the accused Jatin Ganjeer, is being annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R/4 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 8. That, another offence has been registered at Police Station 8 Khamhardih, Raipur on 07.07.2025 against the accused Wasim Akram Khan vide Crime No. 150/2025, punishable under Sections 296, 351 (2), 191 (2), 333 and 109 of the B.N.S., 2023 wherein, while the injured applicant was being medically examined at Mekahara Hospital Raipur, one accused Wasim Akram Khan assaulted the injured person/complainant/ victim while hurling abuses and issuing threats to kill, without any reason at Mekahara Hospital, Raipur. After which, the said accused Wasim Akram Khan was made an accused in the said case in Khamhardih Police Station as evidence of crime was found against him, who is absconding since the incident. A report has been received from Police Station Khamhardih in the said matter. The accused Wasim Akram Khan and his associates had committed the crime in the Mekahara Hospital Premises in the case of Moudhapara Police Station and again in the case of Khamhardih Police Station, they repeated the crime in Mekahara Hospital and beat up the injured victim which shows the criminal tendency of the accused persons. Therefore, it appears from the instant writ petition filed by the accused petitioners that, the instant writ petition has been filed by them against the police to influence the legal action taken against them by the Police to discourage the police and to affect their morale and to gain sympathy on a misleading basis. Copy of the FIR dated 07.07.2025 under Crime No. 150/2025, registered at Police Station Khamhardih, Raipur against the accused Wasim Akram Khan for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351 (2), 191 (2), 333 and 109 of the B.N.S., 2023, is being annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R/5 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 9. That, on behalf of the Answering Respondents Authorities, it is humbly submitted that, the instant writ petition as framed and filed by the petitioners against the Answering Respondents Authority, is without any substance, deserves to be dismissed, as the present Petitioners have failed to demonstrate any 9 infringement of right for which, a writ may be issued by the Hon'ble Court. 10. That, at the outset, it is respectfully submitted by the Answering Respondents that, all the adverse allegations leveled by the petitioners anywhere in the entire writ petition against the Answering Respondents, the same are categorically and vehemently denied. 11. That, on the basis of complaint made by the complainant against the present petitioners on cognizable offence, the impugned FIR has been registered against the present accused petitioners, as prima facie, the Answering Respondents are obliged to register an FIR as per law and there is no infirmity or illegality in the same and the same is strictly in accordance with law. 12. That, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the Answering Respondents in the preceding