Manoj Kumar Prasad @ Manoj Kumar Madhukar v. The State Of Bihar Through The District Magistrate Gopalganj, And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1722 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year- Thana- District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Manoj Kumar Prasad @ Manoj Kumar Madhukar, Son of Late Dinanath Prasad, Resident of Village- Siswan, P.S.- Bishambharpur, DistrictGopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate Gopalganj, DistrictGopalganj.
2. The Superintendent of Police Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj.
3. The Officer In Charge, Kuchaikot Police Station, District- Gopalganj.
4. Dhrub Sah, S/o Late Kailash Sah, Resident of Village- Kuchaikot, P.S.- Kuchaikot, District- Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Partha Sarthy,GA 4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 01-10-2018 This Court has been informed by learned counsel representing the State that the vehicle in question has now been recovered by police and a seizure list has been filed in the court below.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, on the petitioner's filing an application in the court below showing the documents of ownership and registration, the vehicle in question shall be released on the petitioner's submitting two sureties of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand) each in the court below. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised certain grievance over the conduct of respondent no.4. However,
Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.1722 of 2018(5) dt.01-10-2018 2/2 respondent no. 4 is not present in Court and learned counsel representing him submits that even though he has got instruction to appear but there is no further instruction with regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.
In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court would leave it open for the petitioner to sue respondent no. 4, in case he is so advised, in an appropriate proceeding.
This application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) mrl./- U