MEERU Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH the consent of Learned Counsel for parties, matter is finally heard. The grievance of petitioner is that he was served with a show -cause notice Annexure P/3 dated 15th May, 2012. The petitioner submits his reply Annexure P/4 dated 09/07/2012. Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a separate application Annexure P/2 before the District Magistrate on 09/07/2012 and made a request that as per the principle of natural justice, the statement of certain persons be provided to him and he be permitted to cross examine those persons. By placing reliance on the notice Annexure P/1 Shri Prateep Visoriya, Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that the said document have not been provided to the petitioner and no certified copy is supplied to him by the office of District Magistrate. The note appended below Annexure P/1 wherein it is stated that pursuant to the order of District Magistrate dated 24/07/2012 no certified copies can be given to the petitioner. Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that as per Section 8 of M.P. Rajya Suraksha Adhiniyam, it is obligatory for the District Magistrate to conduct enquiry as per the principle of natural justice. Learned Counsel for petitioner further submits that the statements recorded behind the back of certain witnesses cannot be treated as gospel truth unless those persons are put to cross -examination by petitioner. Learned Counsel for petitioner relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Nyaju @ Niyaj Mohammed S/o Gullu Kha Vs. State of M.P. reported in : 2000(1) M.P.L.J. 348.

(2.) LEARNED Deputy Government Advocate for State has not disputed the aforesaid legal position. Considering the aforesaid legal position I deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with the following directions without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case: -

(3.) WITH the aforesaid petition is disposed of. Certified copy today.