Archana Kumari v. The State Of Bihar Through The Additional Chief Secretary, Home Dep., Gov. Of Bihar, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1854 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Begusarai ====================================================== Archana Kumari Wife of Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Kumar Poddar R/o Mohalla - Sabji Bazar near Sethani Dharmsala, ward no. 32, P.S. - Town, Distt. - Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Dep., Gov. of Bihar, Patna Bihar 2.

The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna Bihar 3.

The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Begusarai Bihar 4.

The Superintendent of Police, Begusarai Bihar 5.

The S.H.O. Police Station Muffasil, Begusarai Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Maya Shankar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC-8 Mr. Ruchikar Ojha, AC to SC-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER 19-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the police attached to Muffasil Begusarai police station without any reason illegally lifted the petitioner and her husband on 22.04.2023 at about 11:30 p.m. at night and brought him to the local police station, found them in police lockup near about 20 hours and the petitioner was assaulted by the police attached to the said police station and thereby committed offence under Sections 341, 342, 323, 504/34 of the I.P.C.

3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1854 of 2023(2) dt.19-04-2024 2/2 petitioner lodged complaint before the Higher Officers of the Police Authority but the police did not take any steps against the erring police officers.

4. The petitioner did not filed any complaint before the S.H.O. of the concerned police station. She also did not filed any complaint under Section 190 of the Cr.P.C. before the jurisdictional Magistrate with a prayer to treat the same as a complaint case and issue process against the accused persons when efficacious relief is available under the Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioner cannot seek for extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

5. Therefore, I do no find any merit in the instant writ petition and accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed on contest.

6. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a complaint case in the Court of the Jurisdictional Magistrate, subject to the law of limitation. However, while assessing the period of limitation the learned Magistrate is at liberty to consider that the petitioner diligently was proceeding with the instant writ petition out of inadvertence seeking for appropriate relief.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J) mdrashid/- U T