Fulman Singh Advocate v. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Patna , Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.724 of 2014 ====================================================== Fulman Singh (Advocate) son of Late Jung Bahadur Singh resident of village - Takiya, P.O. Takiya Bazar, P.S. Sasaram ( Model ), DistrictRohtas ( Bihar ) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Patna , ( Bihar )

2. The Home Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna ( Bihar )

3. The Law Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna ( Bihar )

4. The District Magistrate, District - Rohtas ( Bihar )

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

6. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Dehri-on-Sone, District - Rohtas ( Bihar )

7. The Superintendent of Police, District - Rohtas ( Bihar )

8. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, District - Rohtas ( Bihar )

9. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sub Division Sasaram, District - Rohtas (Bihar)

10. The Officer-in-charge, P.S.- Sasaram ( Model ), District - Rohtas (Bihar) .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ful Man Singh (in person) For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-02-2015 Heard Mr. Fulman Singh, the petitioner, who appears in person.

The petitioner is informant of Sasaram (Model) P.S.Case No.460 of 2014 dated 30th May, 2014 registered for the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 342, 504, 448 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. He has filed this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to direct the respondents to include sections 323, 382, 395 and 427 of the

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.724 of 2014 (2) dt.20-02-2015 2/2 Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act in the aforesaid police case.

In my view, the application is thoroughly misconceived. To hold investigation into a cognizable offence is the statutory right of the police. At this stage, the Court has no role to play. Once the investigation is over and the police submit their report, it would be open to the Magistrate to consider the materials collected in course of investigation and proceed in accordance with law.

I find no merit in the application. Accordingly, it is dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./- U T