Satyendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.780 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. Year Thana District- NAWADA =========================================================== Satyendra Yadav, Son of Late Kishun Yadav, resident of village- Mahaviya Tari, P.O. Dhamni, P.S.- Rajauli, District- Nawada .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Nawada

3. The Superintendent of Police, Nawada

4. The Officer-in-Charge, Rajauli, Nawada

5. Gurjeet Singh @ Haribansh Singh, S/o- Kirpal Singh, Mosinpur, Kolkata Chandmari, Kohima, Nagaland Kohima 79001

6. Ranjeet Yadav, son of Baleshwar Yadav, resident of village - Alma Rafiganj, P.S. Rajauli, Distt.- Nawada .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajnish Chandra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-4 Mr. Amit Kumar Jha, AC to AAG-4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 16-11-2016 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court for a direction to the respondents to make proper enquiry of the matter relating to murder of his son. The petitioner has lodged Rajauli P.S. Case No.46 of 2016 dated 27.02.2016 stating therein that his son Upendra Prasad Yadav was taken by Gurjeet Singh to work as Khalasi in his vehicle bearing No. NL-01G 9173, 15 days before 22nd of February, 2016 and that the dead body of the son was thrown at the door of the house of the petitioner. The apprehension is that the owner of the vehicle has murdered his son for some reasons.

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.780 of 2016 dt.16-11-2016 2/2

3. In the counter affidavit dated 09.11.2016 it has been pointed out that the police authorities have been directed to arrest Ranjeet Yadav, son of Baleshwar Yadav, the driver of the vehicle, and if he is not arrested to initiate attachment proceedings. It is also pointed out that there is contradiction between the version of the First Information Report and the version of paragraph No.6 of the writ petition.

4. Keeping in view the fact that the police is investigating the case, we do not find any further directions are called for. The police is directed to complete the investigations expeditiously in accordance with law.

5. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (Hemant Gupta, ACJ) K.C.jha/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 19.11.2016 Transmission Date 19.11.2016