- (1.) I .A. No. 1952 of 2012 has been filed for amendment in the prayer portion of the main writ application by inserting the following paragraphs:- (a) The petitioner humbly submitted before this Hon'ble Court hat matter may kindly be investigated by the other independent agencies like CBI, CID or Vigilance. The Officer In-charge of Kurdeg Police Station has tamper with the enclosure of the paper of F.I.R. He has taken out the pag-te no. 6 of the enclosure No. 2, which contains the contexts of the Gram Sabh-ua register and is enclosed with my letter for lodging F.I.R. and is also part of certified copy of Secretary, District Legal Service authority, Simdega at page no. 13 which is more relevant and important paper on which the police have not investigated and police has tried to given the benefit to the accused persons. (b) From perusal of case diary para 68 and 71 as reported by I.O. of the case has reported to Superior Officer about cutting and pressurizing I.O. of the case by officer Incharge Narendra Mohan Sinhya tamper with the record and compel him to give the benefit to the accused persons this is very serious allegation against the police ao, the investigation to the otehr agencies may be handed over in the interest of justice. (c) That the petitioner humbly prays that after investigation the action also be taken against those persons who are responsible for manipulation/tamper with the record.
(2.) FROM perusal of aforesaid proposed prayer, it is clear that petitioner had made certain allegation against the Officer In-Charge of Kurdeg Police Station that he has not investigated the case properly in respect of distribution of Indira Awas. It is also alleged that the said Officer In-Charge had tampered with the record and compelled the petitioner to give the benefit to the accused persons. It is an admitted position that petitioner is the informant of Kurdeg P.S. Case No. 2 of 2011. Under the said circumstances, if petitioner had any grievance regarding the submission of charge sheet, he ought to have filed a protest petition in the court below. There is nothing in this I.A. to show that petitioner has filed any protest petition. Moreover, if petitioner has any grievance regarding the Officer In-Charge of the Kurdeg Police Station that he has manipulated or tampered with the records, then petitioner ought to have filed a separate case against him before the appropriate forum. Under the said circumstance, I find no merit in I.A. No. 1952 of 2012 and the same is disposed of. In this writ application, petitioner has prayed that a direction be given to the respondents to submit the final form in Kurdeg P. S. Case No. 2 of 2011. It has been stated in the counter afidavit dated 21.6.2011 at paragraph no. 12 that the charge sheet has already been submitted in Kurdeg P.S. Case No. 2 of 2011. Under the said circumstance, the final form has already been submitted in Kurdeg P.S. Case No. 2 of 2011. Thus, the main writ application has become infructuous. Under the said circumstance, the main writ application as well as I.A. No. 586 of 2013 are disposed of as infructuous. It is made clear that if petitioner has any security problem, he can approach the appropriate authority.;