Shilpi Kumari v. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1110 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2015 Thana- KARJA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Shilpi Kumari (Minor) D?o Dilip Thakur @ Dilip Kumar (represented through her Father as a Natural Guardian and Nest Friend) resident of VillageBorwara, P.S.- Karja, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Superintendent of Police Muzaffarpur, District- Muzaffarpur.
4. The Officer-in-charge of Karaja Police Station, District- Muzaffarpur.
5. Suraj Kumar son of Sone Lal Thakur R/o Village Rampur Laxmi, P.S.- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur.
6. Mithun Kumar son of Nagendra Thakur R/o Village- Borwara, P.O.- Bhautauna, P.S.- Karja, District- Muzaffarpur.
7. Manoj Thkaur son of Late Babulal Thakur R/o Village- Borwara, P.O.- Bhautauna, P.S.- Karja, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Jai Kishor Poddar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sc8-Sheo Shankar Pd.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 21-08-2018 This writ application has been preferred for a direction to the respondents first set to take legal action against the respondents 2nd set in connection with Karaja P. S. Case No. 132 of 2015 dated 26.11.2015 registered under Sections 448, 323, 376, 511/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Respondents 2nd set are the accused persons who were named in the first information report.
Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State are present.
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1110 of 2016(2) dt.21-08-2018 2/2 Learned counsel for the State submits on instruction that during pendency of this writ application the investigation has been completed and in course of investigation one of the accused namely, Suraj Kumar has been chargesheeted. It is submitted that the other accused persons were exonerated in course of investigation.
Taking note of the aforementioned developments where investigation of the case has now been completed and charge-sheet has already been filed, this writ application has become infructuous.
If the petitioner has still any grievance with respect to the progress in the case in question, he will have all liberty to take appropriate steps in the court below under the Code of Criminal Procedure in accordance with law.
This writ application stands disposed off.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/- U T