Patna High CourtCR. WJC/1014/2014dismissed

Raghunandan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna And

2015-04-22Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1014 of 2014 dt.22-04-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1014 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. 35 Year- 2014 Thana Nirmali District- SUPAUL =========================================================== Raghunandan Yadav Son of Late Nathuni Yadav Resident of Village - Domahan, Police Station - Nirmali, District- Supaul.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, Through The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Bihar, Patna .

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

3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Kosi Division, Saharsa.

4. The Superintendent of Police, Supaul.

5. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer,Nirmali.

6. The Station House Officer, Nirmali Police Station - District- Supaul. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 22-04-2015 The present application has been filed for quashing the First Information Report lodged against the petitioner bearing Nirmali P.S. Case No. 35 of 2014 for the offence under Section 341 and other Sections of IPC and other connected reliefs.

2. Despite repeated calls none appears on behalf of the petitioner, however, learned counsel for the Respondents is present.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 4 which discloses that a permanent warrant had been issued against the petitioner in connection with Sessions

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1014 of 2014 dt.22-04-2015 Trial No. 140 of 2004 by the Court of Sri J.N. Singh, learned A.D.J.,F.T.C.IV, Supaul which was pending for execution and when the S.H.O., Nirmali Police Station went to execute the same he was obstructed and manhandled by the petitioner along with his sons giving rise to the present Nirmali P.S.Case No. 35 of 2014.

4. On a perusal of the FIR in question, this Court finds that prima facie a cognizable offence against the petitioner is made out and thus the matter which warrants no interference.

5. The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran U T