Yogendra Rai v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Department Of Home, Government Of Bihar, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.857 of 2015 Arising Out of P. S. Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) =========================================================== Yogendra Rai Son of Late Nagdev Rai, resident of Village- Chukunda, Milki Police Station- Sadar Hajipur, District- Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Department of Home, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary Department of Home, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director General of Police, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Zonal Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur.

5. The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajpur.

6. The Superintendent of Police, Vaishali at Hajipur.

7. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hajipur Sadar, Vaishali at Hajipur.

8. The Station House Officer, Hajipur Sadar Police Station, Hajipur DistrictVaishali.

9. Rameshwar Upadhyay, Sub Inspector of Police, Hajipur Sadar P.S., Investigating officer, Hajipur.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raja Ram Rai, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. M. K. Pathak, SC-7 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 21-07-2016 By way of the present application preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of direction to the respondents to make proper

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.857 of 2015 dt.21-07-2016 2/2 investigation in Hajipur Sadar P. S. case No. 545 of 2014 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the investigation of the case is not being done properly and the accused persons are moving freely. 3.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has submitted that the contention of the petitioner is false and out of 15 FIR named accused persons, 12 were either arrested or they surrendered before the court and the investigation of the case is in progress.

4.

In view of the stand of learned counsel for the State, I see no merit in this application. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Kanchan/- U T