Ramchandra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Bihar, And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.704 of 2015 ====================================================== Ramchandra Prasad Son of Late Bhuneshwar Sah resident of village - Madhuban Melabagar Police Station - Madhuban, District - East Champaran ( Motihari ).
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Home, Bihar
2. The Director General of Police, Bihar
3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range Betiya West Champaran
4. The Superintendent of Police, East Champaran ( Motihari )
5. The Sub-Divisional Officer Police Officer Pakridayal Distt. - East Champaran ( Motihari )
6. The Officer - in - Charge Police Station - Madhuban District East Champaran ( Motihari )
7. Sunil Kumar, Son of Sri Bhagawan Sah
8. Bhagawan Sah Son of Late Dev Narayan Sah
9. Sita Devi W/o Bhagawan Sah All are residents of village - Korigawana, P.S. Baluraj, Distt. - Muzaffarpur
10. Saurav Kumar Son of Madan Sah
11. Resami Devi Son of Suman Sah
12. Suman Sah Son of Khedan Sah
13. Rajan Kumar Son of Sundar Sah
14. Sunita Devi Son of Shaurav Kumar
15. Manju Devi W/o Suman Sah All are residents of village - Mela Bajer, Madhuban, P.S. Madhuban, District - East Champaran ( Motihari ) .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Priyank Samdarshi, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Pathak, A.C. to G.P.11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ) 18-09-2015 Heard Mr. Priyank Samdarshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Ashok Kumar Pathak, learned Assistant Counsel to Government Pleader No.11, appearing for the respondent No. 1 to 6.
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.704 of 2015 (5) dt.18-09-2015 2/2 After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw this application with liberty to approach the appropriate authority with appropriate application, if so advised, and also to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible.
No objection has been raised by the respondents to the prayer for withdrawal made by the petitioner. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, this writ application is hereby disposed of as withdrawn with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach this Court with appropriate application, in future, if so advised, and also to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible. (I.A. Ansari, ACJ) (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Sunil/- U