R.N.SINGH SENGAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was the investigating officer in Criminal Case No.47/2014 registered at State Economic Offence Wing/Anti-Corruption Bureau, Raipur. After completion of investigation chargesheet was filed. The Special Judge/First Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, C.G., tried the case as Criminal Case No.02/2017 and passed judgment on 30/5/2019. In the paragraph No.110, the learned trial Court has observed that according to the scrutiny of the evidence, it has been found that one vehicle, the subject matter of the case, which was registered in the name of one Nishant Jain was deliberately shown as the property of accused Kundan Banjare, which is an act of conspiracy. The direction has been issued to the Police Authorities to make inquiry and proceed in accordance with law against the investigating Officer. Observations made and the direction issued are directly against the petitioner. On the basis of findings against the petitioner in the said judgment, some action may be contemplated by the State. He would rely upon the order of Division Bench of this Court passed in the matter of "Ms. Purnima Lama v. State of Chhattisgarh and others" in WPCR No. 425 of 2021, wherein, while dealing with similar issue the Division Bench has expunged the adverse remarks made by the trial Court in para-34, 35 & 36.

(3.) Per Contra, learned State counsel would submit that the learned Court below in para 110 of the judgment dtd. 30/5/2019 clearly mentioned that according to the evidence deliberation made in Sr. No.35 to 40 of the said judgment, the collection of Rs.45,00,000.00 and one Innova Car belonging to Nishant jain of K.B. Group was included in the assets of the accused- Kundan Banjare, and therefore, adverse remarks was made against the petitioner. She would further submit that the learned trial Court after going through the records and appreciation of evidence recorded its finding, hence, no relief can be granted in favour of the petitioner.