Subodh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar, Through The Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.475 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2024 Thana- PATEPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Subodh Kumar S/O Sh. Kamlesh Ray Resident of Village- Repura, P.SPatepur, Distt.- Vaishali, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna Bihar 2.

The Superintendent of Police (SP), Vaishali. Bihar 3.

The SHO/Officer In-Charge of Patepur Police Station Bihar 4.

The Civil Surgeon Cum Chief Medical Officials, Vaishali. Bihar 5.

Dr. Sidharth Kumar, Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Patepur. Bihar 6.

ADD Annex CT Scan Centre, Vaishali Sadar Hospital, Hajipur. Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prakash Chandra For the Respondent/s :

Mr.G.P.25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-07-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

2. This application has been filed for the following reliefs:

(i) For issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus commanding the concerned Respondent No. 3 to conduct a free, fair, independent and effective investigation.

(ii) For issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus commanding the concerned

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.475 of 2025(2) dt.01-07-2025 2/2 respondent No. 3 to record the statement of the eye witness who has seen the occurrence.

(iii) For issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus commanding the concerned respondent to set up and enquiry against the respondent No. 5, Medical official of the Primary health Centre, Patepur who prepared the simple injury report of Tuntun Ray (brother of the Petitioner) in connivance with the accused persons.

3. This application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Magistrate concerned for redressal of his grievances in accordance with law and in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. reported as (2008) 2 SCC 409.

4. If such an application is filed before the Magistrate concerned, the Magistrate will act in accordance with law and will not keep the petition pending.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T