Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 180 (JHR)

Durga Oraon v. State of Jharkhand

2013-02-04

ALOK SINGH, PRAKASH TATIA

body2013
ORDER 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. C.B.I. has filed the report. We have perused the report given by the C.B.I. It appears that the C.B.I., started going deep in the matter after the orders, making it clear that the C.B.I., is required to investigate all aspects of the matter and to clarify and then to find out the accused persons and the investigation is not confined only to the two cases, which have been taken by the C.B.I. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that still the C.B.I., is not touching some of the bureaucrats. 4. Learned counsel for the M.L. Pal, who has been named in one of the supplementary affidavits, has stated that one another writ petition WP (PIL) No. 3352 of 2011 has been filed, which has been dismissed by this Court. This Court, vide order dated 5th November, 2012, has observed:– "We are making it clear that investigation is to be conducted relating to the offence and the accused persons are to be found out by the Investigating agency. Therefore, it is made clear that C.B.I. is free to proceed, in accordance with its own findings to find out the accused persons, according to the investigation as ordered in WP (PIL) No. 4700 of 2008." 5. We need not to make again and again any clarification for any purpose to explain the scope of the investigation by the C.B.I. Therefore, no order is required on supplementary affidavit and the orders passed by us in earlier occasion in this writ petition are sufficient indicator for the C.B.I, and the C.B.I., is required to investigate into the matter, and thereafter, submit the report. After getting the report of investigation only, we can find out whether any person is left out by the C.B.I., or not. 6. The Enforcement Directorate will take effective steps to apprehend the persons, who are absconding and will submit the report about the steps taken by the Enforcement Directorate for apprehending the persons which is not only of issuance of the red corner warrant, but also should show what effective steps to search out the whereabouts of the persons have been taken by C.B.I. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one of the accused Shobik Chattopadhyay was found in the city of Ranchi itself. 8. The Enforcement Directorate may also look into this allegation. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one of the accused Shobik Chattopadhyay was found in the city of Ranchi itself. 8. The Enforcement Directorate may also look into this allegation. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that WP (PIL) No. 2252 of 2009 has the same issue as has already been taken care in WP (PIL) No. 4700 of 2008 and therefore, no need to continue with this petition. 10. In view of the above reasons, WP (PIL) No. 2252 of 2009 stands disposed of and the issue raised in the petition may be considered in WP (PIL) No. 4700 of 2008, which may be pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner in WP (PIL) No. 4700 of 2008. 11. In view of the request of the C.B.I., time is granted to the C.B.I., to proceed with the further investigations. 12. Put up after four weeks. 13. Copy of the order be given to the learned counsel for the C.B.I., as well as learned counsel for the Enforcement Directorate.