Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar Through The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.663 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- ====================================================== Chandan Kumar, Son of Jitendra Kumar Prasad @ Jitendra Saw, Resident of Mohalla - Dulhinbazar, P.S.- Dulhinbazar, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.

3.

The SDPO, Masauri, Patna.

4.

The SHO, Masauri Police Station, Patna.

5.

Shambhu Prasad Gupta, Son of Mahendra Prasad Gupta, Resident of Mohalla - Chhoti Kharma, P.S.- Dulhinbazar, District - Patna. 6.

Priyanka Bharti, Wife of Chandan Kumar, currently Resident at D/oShambhu Prasad Gupta, Mohalla - Chhoti Kharma, P.S.- Dulhinbazar, District - Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Aditya Prakash Sahay, Advocate Mr. Anuraman Sinha, Advocate Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Lalit Kishore, AG For Respondent No.5 :

Mr. Surendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 29-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the State and Shri Surendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent No.5.

In compliance of our order dated 15th of April, 2019, the 6th respondent-Priyanka Bharti is present in Court. She has been identified by the learned counsel for both the parties.

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.663 of 2019(4) dt.29-04-2019 2/2 On a query raised by the Court as to where does she choose to go, a categorical statement has been made by her that she wishes to live with her parent-the respondent No.5. In view of the categorical statement made by the 6th respondent before us, this habeas corpus petition has to fail and is accordingly consigned to records.

The demand draft of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand), which had been deposited by the petitioner, drawn in favour of the respondent no.6, has been handed over to her in Court itself to be encashed by her.

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