Sanjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar Through The Vigilance Bureau Of Investigation And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.846 of 2017 In Cr. WJC 618 of 2016 ====================================================== SANJAY KUMAR, SON OF HARI NARAYA GUPTA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHHOTKI BALIYARI, POLICE STATION BIKRAM, DISTRICT PATNA .... .... petitioner

Versus

1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE VIGILANCE BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION , PATNA

2. SACHINDRA JHA, SI CUM ENQUIRY OFFICER, CAMP ARWAL VIGILANCE INVESTIGATION BUREAU, BIHAR

3. LTHE STASTE OF BIHAR THROUGH MR DILIP MISHRA, SP, ARWAL

4. MR MANOJ SIGH, THE OFFICER IN CHARGE, ARWAL POLICE STATION DISTRICT ARWAL .... .... opposite parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Amish Kumar, Advocate For the Vigilance Department : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the State : Dr. Anand Kuamr, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 02-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite parties.

The pleadings that emerges from the record of the contempt petition and the show cause is that two annexures which the investigating agency was required to examine could not be considered as the same was not made available by the University within time. Now charge sheet has already been submitted.

In view of such development during pendency of the writ petition, no further order needs to be passed in the contempt proceedings.

Patna High Court MJC No.846 of 2017 (5) dt.02-08-2018 2/2 The petitioner however would be at liberty to raise the issue for consideration of the two annexures at the appropriate stage in accordance with law.

The contempt petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) Shashi.

U