NAWAL KISHORE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) L.P.A. No. 208 of 2010 has been preferred by the State of Jharkhand to challenge the impugned Judgment of learned Single Judge dated 02.12.2009, passed in W.P.(S) No. 3878 of 2004, by which the learned Single Judge has set aside the order of dismissal of the petitioner dated 4.5.2003, annexure-13 to the writ petition. However, the learned Single Judge has not allowed the back wages to the writ petitioner. L.P.A. No.235 of 2012 has been preferred by the writ petitioner as learned Single Judge has denied back wages to the writ petitioner and, therefore, by this L.P.A., seeking for back wages.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was posted as Incharge of Ramgarh Police Town Hall Post. On 11.08.2001, he received a written report submitted at the Ramgarh Police Project Town Hall by one Santosh Vishwakarma containing certain allegations against one Priya 2 Ranjan Pandey. The petitioner forwarded the said written report to the Ramgarh Police Station for registration of a case and he himself assumed charge to investigate into the said case. The case was registered as Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 227 of 2001, dated 12.08.2001 for the offence under Sections 341, 323 and 379/34 of Indian Penal Code. The petitioner proceeded to investigate into the matter and arrested the accused and recorded the statements of witnesses and after completing the investigation, he submitted charge-sheet. The cognizance was taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh on the basis of the said chargesheet and case was transferred to the Trial Court for trial. Subsequent to that, on 21.09.2001, the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh directed for further investigation and a further Police Report was submitted in the said case on 31.01.2002, declaring that the case was false. Finding this situation, accused submitted an application before the Trial Court for acceptance of the final report in view of the subsequent investigation report dated 31.01.2002. However, the Trial Magistrate rejected the said application on the ground that further investigation was conducted without prior permission of the Court. Aggrieved against the order of the Trial Court, a revision petition was preferred before the Sessions Judge, Hazaribagth which was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 28.09.2002.