SHIWA KANT TIWARI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010334842026 2026:CGHC:38872
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 6437 of 2026
1 - Shiwa Kant Tiwari S/o Lalla Ram Tiwari Aged About 50 Years
Presently Working On The Post Of Head Constable In 5th Battalion,
C.A.F. Jagdalpur, District- Bastar (C.G.)
... Petitioner
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home
(Police), Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur,
District- Raipur Chhattisgarh
2 - Director General Of Police, Chhattisgarh Police Head Quarter
Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3 - Additional Director General Of Police, Chhattisgarh Police Head
Quarter Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
4 - Inspector General Of Police, C.A.F. Police Head Quarter Raipur,
District- Raipur (C.G.)
5 - Commandant 5th Battalion, C.A.F. Jagdalpur, District- Bastar (C.G.)
6 - Assistant Commandant Departmental Enquiry Officer, Ptc, Borgaon,
District- Kondagaon (C.G.)
... Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Sushil Dubey, Advocate.
For State : Ms. Apurva Tiwari, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Justice Shri Bibhu Datta Guru
Order on Board

2
02/09/2026
1. By the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following
reliefs:-
“10.1 It is therefore prayed that, this Hon'ble
Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire
records pertaining to the case of the petitioner.
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be
pleased to issue a writ/order/direction in nature of
mandamus whereby to issue appropriate
direction to the Respondent Authorities to stay
the proceedings pertaining to the departmental
enquiry pending before the Enquiry Officer
Anand Singh Rawat, Departmental Enquiry
Officer, Assistant Commandant, PTC, Borgaon,
District - Kondagaon (CG) during the pendency
of the criminal proceeding in connection with
Crime No. 136 OF 2025 registered by the P.S. -
Frezarpur, Bastar against the petitioner for the
offence punishable under s. 420, 409, 467, 468,
471, 34 IPC.
10.3 That, any other relief/reliefs, which this
Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of
the petition, may also please be granted to the
petitioner.”
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is presently in jail in connection with Crime No.136 of
2025 registered by the P.S. - Frezarpur, Bastar against the
petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409,

3
467, 468, 471, 34 IPC. During the pendency of the criminal case,
the respondent/Commandant suspended the service of the
petitioner on account of his arrest in aforesaid offence. It is
contended that the petitioner, being in custody, is not in a position
to effectively participate in the disciplinary proceedings, collect
and produce relevant documents, engage with the defence
witnesses or properly instruct his defence representative. He
further submits that unless the petitioner is released on bail or is
otherwise able to effectively participate in the enquiry, irreparable
prejudice would be caused to him and the enquiry may culminate
in an ex parte decision. Learned counsel further submits that by
the communication dated 28/07/2026, regarding appearance of
the petitioner in departmental enquiry, the petitioner made a
representation before the Departmental Enquiry seeking stay the
proceedings of the said enquiry, but the same has not been
considered till date.
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the
petitioner has been arraigned as an accused in connection with
Crime No.136 of 2025 registered by the P.S. - Frezarpur, Bastar
against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections
420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 34 IPC. It is further submitted that,
consequent upon the registration of the said criminal case, the
competent disciplinary authority has also initiated departmental
proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with the

4
applicable service rules. It is submitted that the petitioner's
incarceration, by itself, does not deprive him of the opportunity to
effectively participate in the disciplinary proceedings.
4. I have heard learend counsel for the parties perused the
pleadings and documents.
5. Having considered the aforesaid submission and taking note of
the fact that the petitioner is presently in jail and prima facie may
not be in a position to effectively defend himself in the disciplinary
proceedings, hence, the petition is allowed and the chargesheet
as also the consequential proceedings are kept in abeyance at
this juncture. The respondents are at liberty to continue with the
Departmental Enquiry as and when the petitioner released from
the jail. The petitioner is directed to intimate the disciplinary
authority as and when he will release from jail.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
merits of this case. SD/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru)
Judge
Amardeep