Roushan Singh @ Hako Singh @ Haku Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.562 of 2015 ======================================================
1. Roushan Singh @ Hako Singh @ Haku Singh Son of Santosh Kumar Singh resident of village - Dullhapur, P.S. Simri, District - Buxar .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary , Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna, Bihar
3. The Director General of Police, Government of Bihar, Police Head Quarter, Old Secretariat, Patna
4. The Collector - Cum - District Magistatre, Buxar
5. The Superintendent of Police, Buxar
6. The In Charge, S.H.O., S.C. & S.T. Police Station, Buxar
7. Vindhyachal Ram Son of Late Ram Bachhan Ram @ Ram Bachan Paswan resident of village - Dullhapur, P.S. Simri, District - Buxar .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manendra Kumar Sinha, Mr. Shashi Chandra pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar (A.C. to Sc 10) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-09-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in S.C./S.T. P.S. Case No. 30 of 2014 registered under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short the 'Act').
The petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail before this Court was held to be not maintainable in view of the bar of Section 18 of the Act, vide order dated 23.04.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 47219 of 2014. Thereafter the present writ
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.562 of 2015 (2) dt.11-09-2015 2/2 petition has been filed with a prayer to direct the respondent authorities concerned to get the case investigated properly and save the career of the petitioner. It has been submitted that the petitioner is a student of class-IXth and his date of birth recorded in the register of the school is 02.07.2001. He was aged about fourteen years only on the date of occurrence. He submits that in case the petitioner is remanded to judicial custody, his entire career would be ruined.
In my view, this petition is misconceived. If the petitioner is a juvenile in conflict with law, he has his remedies available under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. There is nothing on record on the basis of which it can be said that the investigation of the case is not being carried out in a fair and impartial manner. It is well settled that the investigation of the case is the prerogative of the police and at this stage, this Court has no role to play.
In that view of the matter, I find no merit in this application, accordingly this application is dismissed. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Sushma/- U T