IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3384 of 2010 1. BINA DEVI W/O LATE RAMA SHANKAR SINGH R/O VILL.- MANGURAHA, P.S.- TARYANI, DISTT.- SHIVHAR, BIHAR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA 3. THE ZONAL INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CENTRAL RANGE PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CENTRAL RANGE, PATNA 5. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATNA ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Awadhesh Kr. Mishra, Adv. For the State:- Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, AC to AAG-7 ------------- 2. 13.9.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is the widow of the deceased A.S.I. who was made an accused in a police case under Section 409 of the I.P.C. with regard to defalcation of Government money. He was also subjected to departmental proceedings and was dismissed on28.6.2006. The counter affidavit states that he preferred an appeal in his life time which was rejected. The counter affidavit further gives details at page 4 and 5 of the attempts made to persuade the husband of the deceased to participate in the departmental proceedings in which he refused to co-operate. He is stated to have been deceased on 2.10.2008. The speculative nature of the writ application is best answered by noticing Paragraph-14 which reads as follows:- 2 "14. That after the death of the delinquent one of his junior colleagues Uma Shankar Shrivastava told the petitioners that some relevant papers in connection of case are lying with him and a writ petition can be filed for redressal of the grievance. There after the petitioners collected the papers from Mr. Shrivastava on 28.06.2009 then without any delay this writ petition is being filed.” Given the social and cultural environment of the society to which the petitioner belongs where woman folk are kept away from the realities of work life, the deceased apparently did not inform his wife in his life time that he had preferred an appeal which had been rejected. This perhaps arose false hopes in the widow. The hands of this Court are fettered by the law and sympathy cannot unshackle them. This Court therefore finds no merits in this writ application seeking the relief questioning the order of dismissal dated 28.6.2006. Counsel of the State fairly acknowledges that if the widow represents before the authority and desires to have copies of any documents with regard to the proceedings against her husband including the appeal, the same shall be made available to her. The writ application stands dismissed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)