- (1.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents raised preliminary objection that the petitioner has not complied with the requirements of the Rules which have been framed by this High Court in the matter of preferring Public Interest Litigation. It is submitted that the petitioner's claim that the petitioner is an association of victims of Sanjeevani Buildcon Ltd. which has floated several projects on the name of housing in various areas of Ranchi and, therefore, all the members of the petitioner association themselves are aggrieved persons and having personal interest. Therefore, they can also prefer any writ petition in their own name as well as in different forms like Criminal Writ Petition or Criminal Miscellaneous Petition etc. for getting appropriate reliefs. We are not inclined to accept such mechanical interpretation of Rule 4 of Jharkhand Public Interest Litigation Rules, 2010 looking to the peculiar facts of this case where allegations are of grave nature and if we hold that in such situation the victims themselves cannot form an association and cannot prefer a petition in the form of Public Interest Litigation, that will be contrary to even the State Litigation Policy itself and that will result into multiplicity of the proceedings because every person may, in different way, approach this Court by filing either Criminal Writ Petition or by filing Criminal Miscellaneous Petition or by any other mode by filing a Criminal Complaint before the Judicial Magistrate and, therefore, there will be not only multiplicity of proceedings but there will be possibility of contradictory orders also. Therefore, in these facts and circumstances, this petition is entertained as Public Interest Litigation in larger interest of the public.
(2.) THE State may submit the status report with respect to the investigation as well as with respect to the efforts made for arrest of the accused persons who have not yet been arrested with reason why they have not been arrested yet. Put up on 01.10.2012.;