Arbind Prasad v. The State Of Bihar Represented Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Of B

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.636 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- PATNA ===========================================================

1. Arbind Prasad son of Late Harihar Prasad resident of Mohalla - Master Colony, Ramchandrapur, Biharsharif, District - Nalanda. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

2. The D.G.P., Bihar, Patna.

3. The I.G. Patna Range, Patna.

4. The D.I.G. Patna Range, Patna.

5. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.

6. The Additional Superintendent of Police, Danapur Sub-Division, District - Patna.

7. The Thana Adhyaksh, Danapur Police Station, District - Patna.

8. Investigation Officer (Lal Babu Paswan) Danapur P.S. Case No. - 326/2016 dated 08.08.2016, District - Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, AC to AAG-3 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 18-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner is informant of Danapur P.S. Case No.326 of 2016, a case registered under Sections 304B/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation is that daughter of the petitioner was done to death by her in-laws for non-fulfillment of the dowry demand.

4. This writ application has been filed for a direction to

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.636 of 2017 dt.18-09-2017 P2/ the State-respondents to properly investigate the case. The respondent authorities have filed their counter affidavit stating therein that the charge sheet has already been submitted after completion of the investigation and only husband has been sent up for trial as there was no evidence against other in-laws.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is sufficient evidence against other in-laws. The petitioner is at liberty to file protest petition before the learned Court-below, who shall pass necessary order according to law.

6. With the aforesaid observation, this writ application stands disposed of.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 20.09.2017 Transmission Date 20.09.2017