Research › Search › Judgment

Sikkim High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 22 (SIK)

Vinay Rai v. State of Sikkim

2014-05-15

N.K.JAIN

body2014
JUDGMENT Jain, CJ (Oral). Heard learned counsel for the parties. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed off finally. 2. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition with the following prayers: “In the premises aforesaid, the humble petitioner prays that your Lordships may be pleased to admit this petition, call for the records of the FIR No. 51 of 2012 dated 01.09.2012 registered by PS, Jorethang and FIR No. 92 of 2013 dated 06.05.2013 lodged by PS Sadar, East Sikkim and further direct judicial enquiry by any retired Judge of this Hon’ble Court into the illegal detention and arrest of your humble petitioner herein by the respondent No. 5 at instance of respondent no. 2 and his higher officials or any other official who has played active role in the entire sequence of events arrest and also for an enquiry into the conduct of respondent no. 2 to 7 for causing illegal detention and arrest of your humble petitioner or pass any other order(s)/direction(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the above-said facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that so far as FIR No. 51/2012 is concerned, the investigating agency has also filed a charge-sheet and he does not press the writ petition to that extent. So far as FIR No. 92/2013 is concerned, he submitted that the said FIR has been quashed by this Court vide order dated 04.06.2013 passed in Crl. Misc. Case No. 12 of 2013. He further submitted that although as per observation/liberty granted in the order dated 04.06.2013 referred above, the police has submitted a supplementary charge-sheet, but the manner in which the petitioner was arrested on 07.05.2013 was illegal and mala fide. Therefore, the present writ petition was filed for passing an order for judicial enquiry. 4. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that the petitioner filed a representation dated 03.12.2013, Annexure P-1-, to the Hon’ble Minister of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi, Hon’ble Governor of Sikkim, Gangtok and Hon’ble Chief Minister of Sikkim, in this regard, but no action has been taken on his representation. 4. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that the petitioner filed a representation dated 03.12.2013, Annexure P-1-, to the Hon’ble Minister of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi, Hon’ble Governor of Sikkim, Gangtok and Hon’ble Chief Minister of Sikkim, in this regard, but no action has been taken on his representation. He also referred a letter during course of arguments of May, 2014 of Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Internal Security-II Division (Legal Cell) addressed to the Secretary (Home), Government of Sikkim, Gangtok, whereby representation of petitioner has been forwarded but till date no action has been taken by the respondents. He, therefore, submitted that either an order of judicial enquiry be passed or the respondent-State be directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner, after affording him an opportunity of personal hearing. 5. Mr. J.B. Pradhan, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the letter of Government of India is only of May, 2014, therefore, it is not known whether it has reached in the hands of respondent-State or not. Therefore, it will be appropriate that a liberty may be granted to petitioner to file a fresh representation in accordance with law and respondents be directed to decide the same, after hearing petitioner, in accordance with law. 6. As agreed by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed off as under: - (i) The petitioner will file a fresh representation along with all necessary documents to the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Sikkim, Gangtok about his so called illegal arrest on 07.05.2013, within a period of four weeks from today. (ii) The principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Sikkim is directed to decide the said representation within a period of 3 months from the date of its receipt, in accordance with law. (iii) If the petitioner files an application for personal hearing, then the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Sikkim shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. (iv) The representation will be decided by a reasoned order. 7. With the aforesaid observations, liberty and directions, the writ petition stands disposed off.