← Library
Patna High CourtCR. WJC/1234/2014dismissed

Kari Mahto v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-08-18Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1234 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- MADHUBANI ===========================================================

1. Kari Mahto, Son of Madhukar Mahto, Resident of Village- Bela Tale (Nawtoli), Police Station- Babubarhi, District- Madhubani .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Director General of Police

3. D.I.G., Darbhanga

4. I.G., Darbhanga

5. Superintendent of Police, Madhubani

6. Dy. S.P. Sadar, Madhubani

7. S.I. of Babubarhi

8. Sarwdeo Ram, Son of Late Khattar Ram, Village- Bella Nautally, Police StationBabubarhi, District- Madhubani .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Narayan Mahto, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. M.K.Pathak, SC-7 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 18-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The present writ application filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is thoroughly misconceived. The prayer of the petitioner in the present writ application is to direct respondent no.7 Sub Inspector of Babubarhi to lodge an FIR against respondent no.8 Sarwdeo Ram, who is a dealer under the Public Distribution System.

From perusal of the averments made in the writ

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1234 of 2014 dt.18-08-2015 2/2 application, it would appear that the petitioner has not lodged any report before the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station. He has not filed any written complaint even before the Superintendent of Police. Without any application to the police for institution of the First Information Report, the petitioner has approached this Court for issuance of a direction to respondent no.7 to institute an FIR against the respondent no.8.

The application is devoid of merit. Accordingly, it is dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Pradeep/- U T