Awadhesh Kumar Singh 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.559 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-952 Year-2018 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== Awadhesh Kumar Singh, Son of Braj Kishore Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Chandwara, P.O.- Kartahan Buzurg, P.S.- Kartahan Buzurg, DistrictVaishali, at present residing at Mohalla- Majhauli Dharamdas, P.O.- Bela Ramna, P.S.- Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Additional Director General of Police (Head Quarters) Bihar, Patna. 5.

The Inspector General of Police (Security), Special Branch, Bihar, Patna. 6.

The Inspector General of Police, Turhut Zone, Muzaffarpur. 7.

The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur. 8.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

9.

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur. 10.

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Town, Muzaffarpur. 11.

The Officer in Charge, Town P.S.- Muzaffarpur. 12.

The Officer-in-Charge, Sadar P.S., Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Verma, Advocate Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate Mr. Suman Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Respondents :

Mr.Prabhu Narayan Sharma, A.C. to A.G.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 29-03-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

This writ petition has been framed as a Criminal Writ

2/4 Jurisdiction Writ Petition levelling allegation against the respondents that they with a malicious intention had taken the petitioner into unlawful custody on the night of 12th/13th of December, 2018 and this custody continued, whereafter a fake case appears to have been registered against the petitioner in respect of the possession of an arms licence on the basis of manipulated documents.

The petitioner was taken into judicial custody and sent on remand. This is evident from the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 15th December, 2018. Prima facie, the question of unlawful custody therefore does not arise, but on the insistence of the learned counsel to go through the records, we have gone through the Licensing AuthorityMaster Report, which has been filed at page 39 of the paper book.

The same is reproduced herein under: "Arms License Issuance Authority DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MUZAFFARPUR, BIHAR LICENSE HOLDER MASTER REPORT ___________________________________________________ Name of the : SHRI AWADISH KUMAR SINGH UIN : 051680029543442016 Father's Name : BRIJ KISHOR SINGH License Type : INDIVIDUAL Date of Birth : 01/JAN/1974 Permanent Address Present Address: C/O RIME BUILDING GANGA : VILLAGE CHANDEWARA Police Station : ITANAGAR District : KATIHAR District : PAPUMPARE (CITY) State : BIHAR State : ARUNACHAL PRADESH Email Address: NOT AVAILABLE Tele.No.

3/4 LICENSE NUMBER WEAPON CATEGORY WEAPON TYPE WEAPON BORE WEAPON NUMBER NO OF CARTRIDGE (Ammunition Allowed One Time/Ammunit -ion Allowed Yearly) WEAPON MAKE WEAPON STATUS PERMISSIBLE DBBL DBBL 10353/2018 NA ACTIVE HMB/AP/18/ ARMS/13 Learned counsel submits that this was a valid licence, which has been issued from Arunachal Pradesh and there appears to be an error of record in the computer by mentioning the district of Katihar.

Page 48 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) is a verification letter stated to have been issued by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh on 24th January, 2019 and in the said verification report, a mention has been made about the district of Vaishali and the date of renewal as 29.05.2015 and renewed up to 18th February, 2019. On a comparison of the aforesaid documents with the License Holder Master Report, it is obvious that the district shown was Katihar, which is not the district of the petitioner and even otherwise the licence number as indicated suffers from an incorrect description to the extent that the I.D. number and UIN number are not mentioned in the License Holder Master Report. Secondly, the licence was valid, according to the master report, from 19th February, 2013 to 19th February, 2016. This does not match with the date of renewal as mentioned in Annexure 4. The aforesaid documents are

4/4 therefore sufficient enough so as to raise a point of investigation and for prosecuting the petitioner under the offences for which action has been taken. This writ petition is not only misconceived but also has been filed for some ulterior purpose. The insistence of the learned counsel and the background in which this petition has been filed calls for an imposition of heavy cost but we refrain from doing so at this stage.

The petition is accordingly dismissed.

(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ) (Anjana Mishra, J) PNM/Saif U T