Om Prakash Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar Through The Vigilance, Bihar, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.221 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2016 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Om Prakash Manjhi Son of Late Lakshmi Manjhi, Resident of M.I.G.-208, Hanuman Nagar, P.S.- Patrakar Nagar, District- Patna, Presently posted as Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Work Circle, Siwanunder suspension.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar Through The Vigilance, Bihar, Patna 2.

The Additional Director General of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Superintendent of Police,Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Inspector, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna. 5.

Sanctioning Authority, Govt. of Bihar, Patna ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajendra Narayan, Sr. Advocate Ms.Anita Kumari, Advocate For the Vigilance :

Mr. Anil Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Iqbal Asif Niazi, AC to GP-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 29-11-2022 This Court has been informed by Mr. Iqbal Asif Niazi, learned AC to GP-5 for the State that after the order dated 14.11.2022 passed by this Court, the sanctioning authority has granted sanction for prosecution of the petitioner. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner though prays for adjournment to allow him to challenge the sanction order in this very writ application, this Court is of the considered opinion that a challenge to the sanction order, if at all advised to the petitioner, may be made by way of a separate writ application. For that, this Court leaves it open to the petitioner to

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.221 of 2017(11) dt.29-11-2022 2/2 raise all such grounds which are available to him. So far as the present writ application is concerned, this Court is of the opinion that in the changed circumstances this cannot proceed. It is being disposed of accordingly with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh application, if so advised. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U