Rajesh Raushan v. The State Of Bihar Through Principal Secretary Department Of Home, Government Of Bihar, Patna And O

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.618 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-271 Year-2015 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Rajesh Raushan son of Mahendra Kumar Singh @ Raghbendra Singh, Resident of Village- Narayanpur, P.S.- Gayaghat, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Director General of Police, Patna.

3.

The Inspector General of Police, Darbhanga.

4.

The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Darbhanga. 5.

The Superintendent of Police, Samastipur.

6.

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Samastipur. 7.

The Inspector of Police, Samastipur.

8.

The Officer Incharge of Muffasil P.S., District- Samastipur. 9.

Anil Kumar Singh, son of Late Yaswant Singh, Resident of VillageBasdeopur Chandel, P.S.- Mahnar, District- Vaishali. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 06-08-2019 No one appears for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State is present.

2.

Perused the writ petition and the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State.

3.

This application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the first information report (for short 'FIR') of

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.618 of 2017 dt.06-08-2019 2/2 Samastipur Mufassil P.S. Case No.271 of 2015 dated 10.09.2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 341, 323, 379, 504, 506, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the India Penal Code.

4.

On perusal of the FIR, as contained in Annexure-1A to the present application, I find that ingredient of a cognizable offence is made out.

5.

To hold investigation into a cognizable offence is the statutory right of the police. 6.

In that view of the matter, neither institution of the FIR nor investigation of the case can be held to be bad in law.

7.

The application, being devoid of any merit, is dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md. S/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 09.08.2019 Transmission Date 09.08.2019