Vishundev Ram v. The State Of Bihar Through Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1649 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2023 Thana- SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaharsa ====================================================== Vishundev Ram Son Of Late Dukha Ram R/V- Vijwar, Ward No. -12, P.S.- Mahishi, Distt.- Saharsa ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar Through Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna Bihar 2.

The Inspector General Of Police, Koshi Division, Saharsa Bihar 3.

The Deputy Inspector General Of Police, Koshi Division, Saharsa Bihar 4.

The Superintendent Of Police, Saharsa Bihar 5.

The Station Head Ofice (S.H.O), Mahishi, Saharsa Bihar ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Navjot Yeshu, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. G.P.4 Mr. Deepak Kumar, AC to GP-4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner prays for a direction upon the Additional District & Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge, Saharsa to either take cognizance on the basis of the Complaint Case No.62 of 2023, dated 19.08.2023 (Trial No.158 of 2023) as against the accused of the said Complaint Case or direction may be issued to the Additional District & Sessions Judge-1st-cumSpecial Judge, Saharsa to send the said complaint to the police under Section 156(3) of the Cr.PC for proper investigation. He

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1649 of 2024(2) dt.29-04-2025 2/2 further prays for a direction upon the respondents to provide proper security to the petitioner and his other family members as there is regular threatening from the accused persons.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the F.I.R. has been registered.

4. In these circumstances, this application is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Superintendent of Police, Saharsa with his representation for providing proper security. If the Superintendent of Police, Saharsa feels that the petitioner needs police protection and is being threatened by the other side, he may pass an order in accordance with law. If the Superintendent of Police, Saharsa finds that there is no threat to the petitioner and his family members from the other side, no order of police protection is required.

5. It is made clear that the Court has not applied its mind to the facts of the case.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) shikha/- U T