Patna High CourtCR. WJC/658/2016disposed

Md. Mahmood Alam Khan v. The State Of Bihar Through The District Magistrate West Champaran Bettiah And ORS

2017-08-03Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.658 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Md. Mahmood Alam Khan Son of late Rajqaar Khan Resident of Village- Pakri Bisauli, P.O. Amolwa, P.S Gaunaha District West Champaran Bettiah.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar Through The District Magistrate West Champaran (Bettiah)

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

3. The Inspector General of Police, Bihar, Patna.

4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police , Bihar,Patna.

5. The Superintendent of Police, West Champaran, Bettiah

6. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah.

7. The Circle Officer, Gaunana, District West Champaran Bettiah.

8. The Officer In-charge Gaunaha Police Station District West Champaran Bettiah.

9. Sunil kumar son of not known Revenue Karmchari Semra Srirampur Circle , P.S. Gaunaha District west Champaran Bettiah.

10. Sohan Mahto Son of late Hetu Mahto Resident of Village Meghauli, P.O Bhittarwar Ashram, PS. Gaunaha, district West Champaran Bettiah. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhusudan Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-4 Mr. Amit Kumar Jha, AC to AAG-4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-08-2017 Supplementary counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No.5 and reply to that affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the petitioner.

The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for issuance of mandamus to the State-respondent for protecting the life and property of the petitioner, who is on threat at the hands of respondent No.10 Sohan Mahto.

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.658 of 2016 (8) dt.03-08-2017 2/2 Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the State-respondent is that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court after interference by the administration. Hence, the petitioner has no grievance now to be redressed. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- U T