Patna High Court
Jagannath Singh vs The State Of Bihar Through Home ... on 3 February, 2016
Author: Ashwani Kumar Singh
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.659 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -null Year- null Thana -null District- PATNA
===========================================================
Jagannath Singh son of Dharmatama Singh, resident of village- Baurahi, P.S.-
Dhanarua, District- Patna.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Home Secretary, Bihar, Patna.
2. Home Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. Superintendent of Police (Rural), Patna.
4. Sub- Divisional Police Officer, Masaurhi, Patna.
5. SHO, Dhanarua Police Station, Masaurhi, Patna.
6. Ranjeet Kumar, S.I. of Police (Investigating Officer), Dhanarua Police Station,
Masaurhi, Patna.
7. Unaib Khan son of late Jubair Khan, resident of B.M.Das Road near police check
post, P.S.- Pibahour, District- Patna, presently working as General Manager,
Vedabaag System Ltd. Manikunj Apartment, House No.1/100, Road No.21 Sri
Krishna Nagar, Patna-800001.
8. Branch Manager, Sonmai Branch of State Bank of India.
.... .... Respondent/s
===========================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. R.N.Dubey, AAG-12
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 03-02-2016 By way of the present application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a direction to be issued to the respondents to further investigate Dhanarua P.S. Case No.195 of 2014 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 469, 471 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. From a bare perusal of the writ petition it would be evident that on completion of investigation, the police have submitted Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.659 of 2015 dt.03-02-2016 2/2 charge-sheet in aforesaid Dhanarua P.S. Case No.195 of 2014 against the sole named accused Rohit Kumar.
3. The petitioner has prayed for a direction to be issued to the respondents to further investigate the matter as some other persons are also involved in the offence alleged in the FIR. The informant of the case Unaib Khan has been made respondent no.7 by the petitioner.
4. Apparently, the petitioner is neither the informant of the case nor an accused named in the FIR nor he has been sent up for trial. In my view, he has got no locus standi in the matter.
5. In that view of the matter, the application is dismissed.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./-
U T