IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.200 of 2011 Smt. Yagya Pal Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 3 20.7.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent nos.1 to 3 be directed to make further investigation in terms of provision of section 173 (8) of Code of Criminal Procedure since the Rail Thana Arrah Case No,13/07 registered on 2.5.2007 in which police submitted final report without collecting relevant materials was not properly investigated. In fact, it is submitted that police submitted a collusive report. In the above circumstance, learned counsel submits that the police deserves to be directed to make further proper investigation. The petitioner has relied upon a decision of apex Court in the case of Rama Chaudhary vrs. State of Bihar; reported in 2009 (3) P.L.J.R. S.C. 45. Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the petitioner has approached this Court in writ jurisdiction ignoring the statutory provision contained in Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioner if aggrieved by the submission of the final report it was always open for him to file protest before the court below which on consideration could be registered as a complaint and proceeded as procedure prescribed under the Code in terms of the provision contained in Chapter XV of the Code. At this stage the learned counsel for the petitioner 2 submits that petitioner proposes to file protest petition in the court below. In case such petition is filed the same will be considered in accordance with law. In the above circumstances, the writ application accordingly stands disposed of. AnilKrSinha (Shailesh Kumar Sinha , J.)