Jamshedpur East MLA Says Judgment Outlines Options for Further Legal Action
The Jharkhand High Court has dismissed MLA Saryu Roy’s petition seeking action against the accused in the Meinhardt scam, while providing clarity on potential next steps. Saryu Roy has made it clear that he would exercize the legal options available to him.
JAMSHEDPUR – The Jharkhand High Court has released its judgment in the case of MLA Saryu Roy’s petition regarding the Meinhardt scam. The court’s decision, while dismissing the petition, offers several avenues for further legal action.
Key Points of the Judgment
The High Court’s ruling emphasizes that since a division bench of two judges has already delivered a verdict on this matter, it would be inappropriate for a single bench to hear the case.
However, the court has outlined multiple options for MLA Roy to pursue the case further:
1. Approach the High Court’s division bench for implementation of the September 28, 2018 order.
2. File an FIR under relevant IPC sections at a police station.
3. File a separate case in a competent court.
MLA Saryu Roy’s Response
MLA Saryu Roy, responding to the judgment, has stated his intention to file an FIR in either Doranda or Dhurwa police station in Ranchi.
He plans to request that the police obtain and act upon the preliminary investigation report submitted by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) to the High Court in a sealed envelope.
Legal Options Outlined by the Court
The High Court’s judgment provides a clear roadmap for further action in the Meinhardt scam case. Here’s a breakdown of the options available to MLA Saryu Roy:
|
Option |
Description |
|
1 |
Approach the High Court’s division bench for implementation of the September 28, 2018 order |
|
2 |
File an FIR under relevant IPC sections at a police station |
|
3 |
File a separate case in a competent court |
MLA Roy has chosen to pursue the second option, stating his intention to file an FIR soon.
Background of the Case
The case revolves around alleged irregularities in the selection of consultants for Meinhardt. The ACB has conducted a preliminary investigation and submitted its report to the High Court in a sealed envelope during the hearing of Roy’s writ petition.
MLA Roy emphasized that the court’s decision does not dismiss the allegations but rather provides alternative routes for pursuing the case. He stated, "If anyone claims there’s a different High Court order on this matter, let them present it."
