Patna High CourtCWJC/4025/2017dismissed

Manibhushan Pratap Sengar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-07-11The Chief Justice,Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4025 of 2017 =========================================================== Manibhushan Pratap Sengar, S/o Jitendra Kumar Singh, resident of Mohalla - Premji Colony, Kharaunia bagicha, Agamkuan, P.S. By Pass, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through Chief Secretary, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Patna

3. The Principal Secretary, General Administrative Department, Patna.

4. The Director General of Police, Patna

5. The Additional Director General (Law and Order), Patna

6. The Chairman, IAS Association Bihar, Patna

7. The Commissioner, Patna

8. The District Magistrate, Patna

9. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna

10. The Superintendent of Police, Patna

11. The SDO, Patna Sadar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Lalit Kishore, PAAG-1 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 11-07-2017 None appears for the petitioner.

Sri Lalit Kishore, Principal Additional Advocate General-1 for the State.

Petitioner claiming to be a vigilant citizen seeks a direction to the respondents to enquire as to under whose fault or direction the Bihar I.A.S. Association has violated Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. which used to exist during the Bihar Legislative Council

Patna High Court CWJC No.4025 of 2017 dt.11-07-2017 2/2 Budget Session, 2017. Taking note of the manner in which the petition has been filed, the grievance indicated therein, we find no public interest involved in the matter warranting consideration and prima facie we are convinced that it is not a case to be looked into in a Public Interest Litigation under Article 226 of the Constitution and primarily we feel that it is a misuse of the process of law. Accordingly, we dismiss the writ petition.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) P.K.P.

AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 14.07.2017 Transmission Date