24 July 2021 1:38 PM GMT
The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to quash an FIR against a suspended Additional DGP, who has been accused of tarnishing the reputation of the Government to destroy the peace and harmony of the State. The bench of Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas denied him interim relief of 'no coercive action' in a sedition case registered against him by the Raipur alleging that during the raids in...
The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to quash an FIR against a suspended Additional DGP, who has been accused of tarnishing the reputation of the Government to destroy the peace and harmony of the State.
The bench of Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas denied him interim relief of 'no coercive action' in a sedition case registered against him by the Raipur alleging that during the raids in the location linked to him, some documents were recovered which showed that he has been involved in promoting enmity among the communities.
The facts in brief
The state Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) and Economic Offences Wing (EOW) had registered an FIR against Singh, under the Prevention of Corruption Act on June 29 after preliminary findings into complaints that he had allegedly amassed disproportionate assets.
On July 1, 2021, the residence of the petitioner was raided by the police and they allegedly found some pieces of papers in a drain behind the house of the petitioner which were later on reconstructed by them into some notes, criticize, statistics report against political party and against few representatives of the various wings of the State.
The contents of the reconstructed documents have been alleged to be illicit vengeance and hatred against the State Government and as a result of which, an FIR against him was registered against him for committing offence under Sections 124A & 153A of I.P.C.
"These papers contained objectionable comments against leaders of reputed political parties along with detailed plans of conspiracy," the first information report filed against Singh said, according to PTI.
"Besides, secret assessments related to representatives and candidates of different assembly constituencies along with comments on serious issues of the concerned area were also written on it. The papers also contained critical comments on several government schemes, policies, social and religious issues," the FIR against him reads.
The Counsel appearing for him contended that the registration of FIR was a continuation of the ill-motivated vendetta to rope the petitioner at the whims of State agency under the aegis of the highest authority of the State on account of pre-election propagations made by the party in power.
It was further submitted that the alleged conduct of the petitioner couldn't be called as sedition as this had never been circulated the said content between the public and it had not prompted any enmity between different groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence language and his act does not prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.
Therefore, it was submitted that FIR be quashed, and till the respondents filed their reply, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner.
On the other hand, the Additional Advocate General for the State submitted that from a bare perusal of the documents, it had been found that the contents of the documents are tarnishing the image of the Government.
It was contended that there was something objectionable, which had been written with regard to the community.
Lastly, it was averred that the documents would, prima facie, establishes that it has been written with the intent to tarnish the the reputation of the Government to destroy the peace and harmony of the State and to create hate between various communities.
At the outset, the Court noted that the petitioner had filed bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court, which was later on withdrawn on the pretext that on 13th July 2021, he had filed the writ petition before the Court.
Therefore, the Court remarked:
"Grant of any protection would override the provisions of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. as such, considering the overall material placed before this Court, diary of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to get any interim relief as prayed for by the petitioner and the interim application is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed."
The Court also noted that from a bare perusal of the FIR, it was crystal clear that FIR had been registered on July 8, 2021 and the Writ Petition had been filed on July 13, 2021, as such, it was a premature stage of filing of the petition.
Kishore Bhaduri, Sr. Adv. along with Advocate Sabyasachi Bhaduri appeared for the Petitioner
Case title - Gurjinder Pal Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh
Click Here To Download Order