Patna High CourtCWJC/7717/2014dismissed

Madan Kumar @ Rupu Kumar @ Rupu v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-10-20Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7717 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Madan Kumar @ Rupu Kumar @ Rupu S/o Late Dukhan Pd. Resident of Kanker Bagh, Mohalla, gate No. 15, P.S- Patrakar Nagar, Distt- Patna- 20 .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar represented through its Chief Secretary to the Govt. Old Secretariat, Building, Patna.

2. District Magistrate, Patna Collectorate, Compound, Patna.

3. Senior, S.P.Patna, near Gandhi Maidan, Patna.

4. Dy. S.P. Patna Police line, Patna.

5. Officer Incharge, Agam Kuan Police Station, Patna.

6. O/c Patrakar Nagar Police Station, Patna- 20

7. Bihar Human Right Commission, Bihar, Patna represented through it's chairman Bailey Road, Patna.

8. Superintendent of police, Bihar Human Right Commission, Bihar, Patna Bailey Road, Patna- 15 .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay, S.C..-2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 20-10-2016 Heard Mr. Upadhyay for the State.

On the basis of averments made in the writ petition as well as in the counter affidavit, it is pointed out, the matter has been raised by the petitioner before the Bihar Human Rights Commission (in short 'the Commission') inasmuch as certain explanations have also been sought by the Commission from the concerned authority as is apparent from communication dated 24.10.2013 (Annexure-5). The petitioner has prayed for grant of compensation by the State on account of the death of his father in a suspicious circumstance. According to the petitioner, it was a

Patna High Court CWJC No.7717 of 2014 (2) dt.20-10-2016 2/2 case of negligence on the part of the police machinery. It is difficult for this Court to appreciate such grievance and appraise the relevant facts. In the case at hand, the matter has already been complained before the Commission. In these factual profile, the Court is reluctant to invoke its extraordinary and discretionary writ jurisdiction. The writ application is dismissed.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Pankaj/- U