Patna High CourtMJC/4335/2014disposed

Salma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-08-29The Chief Justice,Mr. Justice Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4335 of 2014 In Cr. WJC 895 of 2014 ====================================================== Salma D/o Mangla alias Md Mahfooz Alam (Lodged in Silai, Karhai and Bunai etc Tranining Centre, Vaishali at Hajipur) R/o Zero Mile Gulab Bagh (Lakhanjhari), P.S. Sadar in the town and District of Purnea (Bihar) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary cum Home Commissioner, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat Building, Patna

2. The Director General of Police cum The Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Old Secretariat Building, Patna

3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Purnea

4. The District Magistrate, Purnea

5. The Superintendent of Police, Patna

6. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Purnea

7. The Thanadhyaksha Sadar P.S. Purnea

8. The Police Inspector, Sadar Circle, Anchal 'A' Purnea

9. The Superintendent of theCare Home, Nishant Gayghat, Patna

10. The Incharge Cum Caretaker, Silai, Bunai and Karhai Tranining Centre, Alpawas Grih, Vaishali at Hajipur, Alpawas Grin (Short Stay Home) Vaishali managed by a private NGO called Nidan Sansthan, Opposite P.K. Jha Residential School, Bagdulhan, Hajipur, District Vaishali at Hajipur .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 29-08-2017 This application has been filed for restoration of Cr. W.J.C. No. 895 of 2014 which was dismissed for want of prosecution more than three years ago on 22.10.2014. When the matter was called out today none appeared

Patna High Court MJC No.4335 of 2014 (3) dt.29-08-2017 2/2 and the defects pointed out by the office has also not been rectified. It seems that with the passage of time the habeas corpus petition is rendered infructuous and none is present. In the above circumstances, the petition is dismissed. Liberty shall be available to the aggrieved persons to initiate fresh proceeding in accordance with law if any dispute or cause still subsists.

With the aforesaid observation the petition is disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) S.Pandey/- U