IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.198 of 2010 PARAMJIT SINGH, SON OF SRI AMAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA- DESHMESH NAGAR, HOUSE NO. 116/A, JAGRAON, P.S.- JAGRAON, DISTRICT- LUDHIANA (PUNJAB). …. PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE BIHAR, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MAGADH RANGE, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MAGADH RANGE, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL, CRIME INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 5. SHIV PURARI TIWARY, SON OF SRI RAJENDRA TIWARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- JAGDISHPUR, P.S.- MOFASSIL, DISTRICT- GAYA. 6. DIRECTOR, FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY, BIHAR, PATNA- 800023. .. RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4. 09.05.2011 Heard both the sides. Despite grant of various opportunities, the learned counsel for respondent no. 5 has not appeared to reply the contentions made by the petitioner. The petitioner has come here with a prayer for directing the respondents to produce Karamjit Singh, driver and Pritpal Singh, Cleaner who were allegedly abducted with the hijacked Truck being No. P.B. 11U- 9409 and a case vide Barachatti P.S. Case No. 302 of 2008 was initially registered under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was not satisfied due to none taking of any step by the police and so he took shelter before the Court. This court on 26.02.2010 directed the learned counsel for the State to 2 seek instruction and file counter affidavit and notice was issued to respondent no. 5 against whom major allegation was levelled. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. On 15.07.2010 the case of the petitioner was summarized in the way that his truck was proceeding from Chandigarh to Orissa with a load of apples. The truck was hired by a consigner and the driver of the petitioner last spoke on 14.10.2008 at about 9:30 P.M. from his Mobile number 9760168583 and at that time he had stopped the van at a line hotel at Barachatti for taking food. The truck at 9:00 P.M. on that day i.e. on 14.10.2008 had crossed the check post at Saokala Toll Plaza as the information was given by the Toll Plaza. Therefore, it was suspected that criminals might have hijacked the truck by eliminating Driver and Cleaner. Thus, First Information Report was lodged with regard of that occurrence on 22.10.2008. When the notice was issued to Superintendent of Police, Gaya then he filed a counter affidavit and reported that the Investigating Officer of the case has been suspended but this was not sufficient compliance and for sufficient redressal to the petitioner, the Court directed the Additional Director General Crime Investigation Department, Government of Bihar to appear before the Court and the Additional Director General, Crime Investigation Department, Patna had physically appeared and the matter proceeded thereafter. Subsequently, 3 respondent no. 5 appeared and annexed some papers but it was alleged that the papers produced by him were fake and fabricated. Therefore, Investigating Agency was directed to investigate the matters regarding the issuance of fake owner book in favour of Shivpurari Tiwari by committing forgery. Respondent no. 5 was directed to file counter affidavit. Time was repeatedly taken by respondent no. 5 but his conduct was evasive. In the meanwhile, by order dated 05.10.2010 Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna, Bihar was impleaded as respondent no. 6 and notice was issued to Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna to examine the genuineness and correctness of a report purported to be a Forensic Science Laboratory. This Court considered the entire matters and on 28.02.2011 passed the following orders and summarized the dispute till then: “ On hearing the parties and on considering the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no. 5 in which he has given no date as to when he returned the truck to the custody of the court which was released to him by the court below, the facts mentioned in third supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Additional Director General of Police, C.I.D., Bihar, (respondent no. 4) and other 4 materials, it is evident that respondent no. 5 has not returned to the custody of the court the truck which was released to him on proper undertaking. The order of the court below releasing the truck in favour of respondent no. 5 has already been set aside in criminal revision and in spite of knowing the legal obligation, respondent no. 5 has taken a false stand that he has surrendered the truck released to him. The truck found abandoned near his house has been found to be different as the material parts bear different numbers. Hence, not only the court below is required to take immediate steps and realise the value of the truck released in favour of respondent no. 5 by resorting to all the methods permissible under law, but the Investigating Agency must obtain permanent warrant of arrest against respondent no. 5 if he does not surrender within a week. Thereafter, if the truck released to respondent no. 5 is not made available for further examination by Forensic Science Laboratory, then appropriate adverse inference shall be drawn against respondent no. 5 by the concerned authorities. It is expected that court of S.D.J.M., Sherghati 5 and the Investigating Officer shall take required steps urgently keeping in view the directions in this order. Further, progress report in the matter shall be brought before this Court by respondent no. 4 through affidavit within six weeks. Put up this matter under the same heading after six weeks.” Despite granting various opportunities, on 13.04.2011 and 06.05.2011, respondent no. 5 did not appear and no reply was filed by him. But it appears from 4th supplementary counter affidavit, of Director General, Crime and Investigating Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (Respondent No. 4) that required actions are being taken in view of specific direction given on 28.02.2011 in this writ application. The matter is before the police authorities and they are to see that the genuine grievance of the petitioner is redressed and it appears from affidavit of respondent no. 4 that steps are being taken as according to the 4th supplementary counter affidavit, permanent warrant of arrest against respondent no. 5 has been issued and warrant has been made available to Senior Superintendent of Police for execution on 28.03.2011. The efforts have also been made for getting the immovable property of respondent no. 5 attached and the Investigating Officer is taking action 6 according to directions. Therefore, the grievances alleged by the petitioner are being redressed and the detailed orders of this Court made on 28.02.2011 are being followed. Hence, there is no use to keep the writ petition pending because the matter is being pursued. Accordingly, no further direction is required. However, it is made clear that the respondents will not sit idle in pursuing the matter. This writ petition thus stands disposed of. Ibrar/- ( Shyam Kishore Sharma, J. ) ( Gopal Prasad, J.)