Simon Kujur S/o Mr. Libin Kujur Aged About 24 Years R/o Gram- Laduva, Post v. 1. 2. 3. 4. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:37855-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 438 of 2025 Simon Kujur S/o Mr. Libin Kujur Aged About 24 Years R/o Gram- Laduva, Post- Sihar, Block-Shankargarh, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. 2. 3. 4. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur C.G. The Superintendent of Police, Balrampur-Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. OfÏcer-In-Charge, Police Station- Shankargarh, Surguja Division, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. Medical OfÏcer, Community Health Center (C H C), Shankargarh, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj C.G. ...Respondent(s) For Petitioner For Respondent/State : :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate. Mr. Shashank Thakur, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Decision
Order on Board 01.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.08.01 19:21:03 +0530 2 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 That, the Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the respondent No. 3 to register a FIR under Section 103 of the BNS and other relevant provisions based on the complaint of the petitioner. 10.2 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or transfer of the investigation to an independent agency to ensure a fair and impartial investigation into the death of Anjila Kujur. 10.3 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus directing an inquiry into the improper and negligent conduct of the postmortem done by the respondent No. 4 and direction to the respondents to exhume the body of deceased Anjila Kujur, buried at Gram-Laldera, for the purpose of conducting a fresh postmortem examination by a panel of independent medical experts under the supervision of a competent authority. 10.4 That, any other relief(s), which the Hon’ble Court deems fit & proper may kindly be pleased to granted in favour of petitioner;” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the incident occurred on 24.10.2024 at Gram Laldera, Police Station Shankargarh, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), when the deceased, Anjila Kujur, went to bathe near her village in the Gair River and was later found dead under suspicious circumstances at the same location. The petitioner made several oral as well as written complaints before the OfÏcer-in-Charge, 3 Police Station Shankargarh, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), but no action was taken by the respondent authorities. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a written complaint dated 05.11.2024 to the Superintendent of Police, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). It is pertinent to mention that the Gair River does not have any significant current and is not deep—being hardly more than one foot deep at the spot where Anjila Kujur went to bathe. The dead body of the deceased was found approximately 200 meters from the bathing location, where the river depth is around 2 to 3 feet. Given the shallow nature of the water, there is no possibility that the deceased could have drowned accidentally or been carried away by the current. As per the medical report, the cause of death was stated to be drowning, allegedly due to an epileptic seizure. However, it is important to note that the deceased had no history of epilepsy and had never received treatment for such a condition. 4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that this heinous incident of 24.10.2024 has two eye-witnesses, namely, Bhukhan Korwa and Shanichari Korwa, both residents of the same village. At the time of the incident, while they were on their way to fish, they witnessed the crime from behind a tree. They saw Harijan, son of Lekhu, and his wife, Basanti, fatally attacking Anjila Kujur with a tangia (a sharp weapon). To support the prosecution, the said eye-witnesses have given their sworn afÏdavits. However, on 12.06.2025, the eye-witnesses were threatened with death by Harijan in an attempt to intimidate them and prevent them from testifying. Furthermore, the petitioner filed an RTI application dated 30.01.2025, seeking information from the Public Information OfÏcer, Shankargarh Hospital, District Balrampur- 4 Ramanujganj, regarding the FSL report of the postmortem examination of the deceased. Despite the lapse of time, the said report has not been provided to the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite repeated requests, respondent No. 3 has failed and neglected to register an FIR under Section 103 of the BNS (previously Section 302 of the IPC), which pertains to a cognizable offence. This inaction is in direct violation of the mandatory provisions under Section 173(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) and Section 154(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), which require police authorities to register an FIR without delay when information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. State of U.P. & Others, reported in [2013] 14 SCR 713, which mandates registration of an FIR in such circumstances. It is further submitted that the postmortem of the deceased, conducted by respondent No. 4 on 25.10.2024 at the Community Health Center (CHC), Shankargarh, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, was performed in a negligent and improper manner. The finding of death due to drowning appears to be the result of an incomplete and hurried examination, with apparent failure to note critical injuries and other discrepancies in the report. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondents’ inaction is arbitrary, mala fide, and amounts to an abuse of power, thereby depriving the petitioner of their right to justice. Such inaction constitutes a violation of the petitioner’s fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which includes the right to life and the right to a fair 5 and impartial investigation. The offence under Section 103 of the BNS is grave in nature, involving the loss of human life, and any delay in registration of the FIR risks destruction of evidence, shielding of the accused, and a miscarriage of justice. Hence, the present petition. 7. On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that the grievance of the petitioner can be very well redressed before the Court below by filing an application under Section 156(3) or 200 of the Cr.P.C. (now, under Section 175(3) or under Section 223 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023). He further submits that the controversy involved in the present matter has already been decided by the High Court of Allahabad in Misc. Bench No. 24492 of 2020 : Waseem Haider vs. State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home Others vide judgment and order dated 14.12.2020 as well as by this Court in WPCR No. 333 of 2020 (Akhilesh Agrawal vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) decided on 12.04.2023, dismissing the said petition, hence, the present petition be also dismissed in terms of the said order. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy before appropriate Forum. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan