Jagjeevan Ram v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Department Home, Government Of Bihar, Patna And

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2069 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District- ====================================================== Jagjeevan Ram Son of Madhu Ram, Resident of Village- Belawon, P.S.- Kaler, District- Arwal.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

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

The Inspector General of Police, Magadh Range, Gaya. 4.

The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Gaya. 5.

The Superintendent of Police, Arwal, 6.

The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas.

7.

The District Magistrate, Arwal.

8.

The District Magistrate, Rohtas (Sasaram).

9.

The Officer Incharge cum Inspector of Police Kaler P.S. District- Arwal. 10.

Bikrama Yadav, Son of Indradeo Yadav, 11.

Chuppa Yadav, Sons of Indradeo Yadav, 12.

Saroj Yadav, Son of Bikrama Yadav, 13.

Manoj Yadav, Son of Bikrama Yadav, 14.

Kameshwar Yadav, Son of Late Hira Yadav, 15.

Jila Yadav, 16.

Motilal Yadav, 17.

Bachan Yadav, all three sons of Megha Narayan Yadav, 18.

Shiv Yadav, Son of not known, 19.

Lal Bahadur Yadav, Son of Meghnarayan Yadav, 20.

Sipahi Yadav, Son of not known, 21.

Hridayanand Yadav, Son of Siyaryadav, All resp. 10 to 21 residents of Village- Danuear, P.S.- Kachhua, DistrictRohtas Sasaram. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Kumar Shanu, AC to AG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 28-11-2022 No one appears for the petitioner. Mr. Kumar Shanu,

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.2069 of 2017(2) dt.28-11-2022 2/2 learned AC to AG appears for the State.

Petitioner in the present case is seeking the following reliefs:- "I. For issuance of writ/writs in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to immediately provide the protection to the petitioner since the life and property of the petitioner is in danger.

II. For commanding the respondents no. 5 to 8 as to why the life and property is in still in danger though the petitioner has been represented themselves though the representation dated 16.08.2017 but the application of the petitioner is still pending and the life and property is still in danger.

III. For issuance of any other writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper as the fact and circumstances of this case."

This writ application was filed in the year 2017, more than five years have gone thereafter. At this stage, since no one has appeared for the petitioner, this Court has reasons to believe that the reliefs prayed in the writ application are no longer required by the petitioner. Hence, he has no interest in pursuing this matter.

This writ application is, thus, dismissed as not pressed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) lekhi/- U