Vijay Pal Singh v. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1001 of 2017 ====================================================== Vijay Pal Singh son of Sri Dalveer Singh resident of 262, Hemant Vihar Barra 2, Thana Barra, Kanpur Nagar, Uttar Pradesh- 208027. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna

2. The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

3. The Secretary, Department of Central Excise & Custom, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

4. The Superintendent (Adjn), Custom Head Quarters Patna.

5. The Superintendent (Prev.) Custom Division, Muzaffarpur.

6. Assistant Commissioner, Custom Division, Muzaffarpur.

7. Inspector Incharge, Customs (P) Division, Muzaffarpur.

8. Pawan Kumar, Assistant Commissioner, Custom Department, Motihari, Bihar.

9. Shailendra Kumar, Superintendent, Custom Department, Motihari, Bihar.

10. Rakesh Verma @ Rakesh Verma, Inspector Custom Department, Motihari, Bihar.

11. Chunenin Singh, Constable (Sepoy) Custom Department, Motihari, Bihar.

12. Punakj Kumar Sharma S/o Sri Yeshwant Kumar Sharma resident of MuhallahBalughat, Brahmasthan, P.S.

Nagar Thana, DistrictMuzaffarpur.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhim Sen Upadhyay, Advocate For the Customs : Mr. Satya Prakash Tripathy, Sr.S.C. For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, A.C. to G.P.7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

11. 20-08-2018 After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the Department of Customs it transpires that the truck in question has already been released and now the petitioner submits that he has no grievance with the Department and he does not want to proceed with the matter.

In view of what transpired in course of hearing

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1001 of 2017 (11) dt.20-08-2018 and the resultant submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ application seems to have become infructuous and is not required to be carried on. This application is, therefore, dismissed as not pressed.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U T