Md. Niyazuddin v. The State Of Bihar Through The D G P, Bihar, Patna And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.42 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- ARRARIA =========================================================== Md. Niyazuddin, Son of Late Majid, Resident of Vill- Bachi Jilehi Chowk, Ward No.3, P.S.- Bairgachhi, District- Araria.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the D G P, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Araria.

3. The Inspector cum S.H.O. Araria, P.S. Araria.

4. Manjar, Son of Aulad, Resident of Vill- Bochi, Ward No.3, P.S.- Bairgachhi, District- Araria.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Adv. For the State : Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, A.C. to A.A.G.-3. For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Kamla Kant Upadhaya, Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ application has been preferred for a command to the respondents to take appropriate action against respondent No.4, Manjar who is accused in connection with Araria (Bairgachhi) P.S.Case No. 256 of 2016.

3. Further prayer is for early conclusion of the investigation of the case.

4. It has been informed by the State-respondent that after investigation, the police submitted final form in this case, as the matter was not of kidnapping rather of love affairs.

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.42 of 2017 dt.27-11-2017

5. Learned counsel for the private respondent No.4 informed that on receipt of final form, the court below has already taken cognizance in the case. Hence, the case will proceed according to law and this Court is not required to do anything further in this matter.

6. The petitioner does not dispute the aforesaid position. However, prayer for necessary direction to the authorities for providing security to the petitioner.

7. The petitioner is at liberty to file a petition before the appropriate authority at the District Level and the authority shall pass necessary order according to law.

8. In view of the conclusion of the investigation, no persuasion is needed at this level. Hence, this writ application stands disposed of accordingly.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Nitesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date28.11.2017 Transmission Date 28.11.2017