Sarita Kumari @ Sarita Jha v. The State Of Bihar Through Home Secretary Govt. Of Bihar, Patna And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2544 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2017 Thana- KHAJAULI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Sarita Kumari @ Sarita Jha Wife of Sri Hriday Nath Jha, resident of Village/Mohalla- New Chakdah, P.S.- Rahika, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar Through Home Secretary Govt. Of Bihar, Patna and Ors 2.

The Director General of Police Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Inspector General of Police Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Deputy Inspector General of Police Darbhanga Division Darbhanga. 5.

The Superintendent of Police, Madhubani.

6.

The District Programme Officer, Madhubani.

7.

The Deputy Superintendent of Police Madhubani. 8.

The Officer In Charge of Khajauli Police Station Madhubani. 9.

The Investigating Officer of Khajauli Police Station Case No. 117 of 2017. 10.

The Proprietor Sanchalak of K.G.B.V. Khajauli, Adarsh Nagar, Ward No. 7, Gaushala Chauk, Madhubani ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gagan Deo Yadav For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Partha Sarthy ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-08-2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed present application for quashing the first information report of Khajauli P.S. Case No. 117 of 2017 dated 14.10.2017 which has been registered against the petitioner on the written statement of proprietor of Kasturba Gandhi Balik Vidyalay Khajauli Madhubani. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the FIR has been registered against the petitioner with malafide intention and with a view to harass the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.2544 of 2017(2) dt.21-08-2025 2/2

2. Learned counsel on behalf of the State submits through counter affidavit that charge sheet has been submitted. He further submits that cognizance has also been taken.

3. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ application with liberty to raise his grievance at appropriate stage.

4. Permission is granted.

5. With the aforesaid liberty, the present writ application stands dismissed as withdrawn.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) vashudha/- U T