Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dilip Kaushal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 September, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia, Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 26 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 7989 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
DILIP KAUSHAL S/O LATE GULABCHANJI KAILASH,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SAMAJ SEVA
AVM BUSINESS 11/5 PARSI MOHALLA, DISTRICT
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI (DR.) MANOHAR LAL DALAL, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH DWARA
MUKHYA SAHIV VALLABH BHAWAN, DISTRICT
BHOPAL. (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. COLLECTOR EVM JILA DANDADHIKARI INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. INDORE NAGAR PALIKA NIGAM THROUGH
A Y U K T INDORE NAGAR NIGAM, INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SHRI BELESHWAR MAHADEV JHULELAL
MANDIR THROUGH ADHYAKSH SEVARAM
G WAN I SCHEME NO. 31, SARVODAY NAGAR,
SNEH NAGAR PATEL NAGAR, STHIT PANI KI
TANKI GARDEN, WARD NO. 63 PAR STHIT,
BELESHWAR MAHADEV JHULELAL MANDIR,
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. BHAWAN ADHAKARI ZONE KRAMAN 18, NAGAR
PALIKA NIGAM, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. DR. ABHAY BEDEKAR, UPPER COLLECTOR EVM
BELESHWAR MAHADEV JHULELAL MANDIR KI
JANCH HETU COLLECTOR INDORE THROUGH
2
NIYUKT JANCH ADHIKARI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(STATE BY SHRI KUSHAL GOYAL, DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL)
(RESPONDENTS NO.3 & 5 BY SHRI ANIKET NAIK, ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day, Justice Vivek Rusia
passed the following:
ORDER
01. The petitioner, who is claiming himself to be a pro bono litigant has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking appointment of a sitting High Court Judge to conduct an enquiry in respect of the incident took place on 30.03.2023 and to give suggestion to prevent such type of incident in future.
02. The petitioner has not filed the present writ petition in the prescribed format as provided under the provisions of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008. The petitioner has not disclosed his antecedents to raise issue by way of Public Interest Litigation. In view of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Surendra Pratap Singh v/s The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others reported in 2019 (1) M.P.L.J. 75 , the petitioner must have disclosed his antecedents, hence, this PIL is not liable to be entertained.
03. According to the petitioner, the said incident took place in the campus of respondent No.4, in which 36 persons lost their life and 18 persons sustained injuries. Although the Chief Minister has ordered for payment of Rs.5,00,000/- to the family of the deceased and Rs.50,000/- to injured, but proper enquiry has not been conducted by the police till date and the respondents are trying to vanish the evidence.
04. Shri Aniket Naik, learned counsel for respondents No.3 & 5 submits that three writ petitions / PILs are already pending before this Court by raising 3 similar issues. In the said writ petitions, reply has been filed and he prays for time to file the reply in this petition also.
05. Shri Dalal, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently opposed the aforesaid prayer of Shri Naik by submitting that the Government is unnecessarily causing delay for disposal of the present writ petition, therefore, the present PIL be heard and decided without return today itself.
06. This Court has issued notices to the respondents on 18.04.2023 & 05.06.2023 and respondent No.4 has been served by Hamdust mode. Respondent No.6 has not been served till date, but Shri Dalal is insisting for final argument in this matter, whereas no petition can be decided without return. The only difference in this petition is that the petitioner is seeking appointment of sitting High Court Judge to conduct an investigation. This matter is under investigation by the police and Magistrate enquiry has also been ordered by the Government, therefore, no case for appointment of High Court Judge to conduct an enquiry and give suggestion is made out in the matter. It is made clear that dismissal of this PIL will not come in way of deciding the other pending WP / PIL on same issue.
07. In view of the above, Writ Petition stands dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
Ravi
Digitally signed by RAVI PRAKASH
Date: 2023.09.29 11:50:28 +05'30'