IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC NO.833 OF 2009 1. SMT. SHAIL DEVI, WIFE OF SRI MATHURA SINGH @ PADARATH SINGH 2. RADHE SHYAM SINGH, SON OF SRI MATHURA SINGH @ PADARATH SINGH, BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE DHIBAR, P.S. PANDARAK IN THE DISTRICT OF PATNA ………………………………………………………….………PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL–CUM-INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 4. THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR, NEW DELHI 5. THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, NEW DELHI 6. THE HOME SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA………………………………………………..…….RESPONDENTS ----------- 4. 18.03.2010 The main writ application was filed with supporting affidavits of one of the sons of petitioner no.1 and brother of petitioner no.2. However, said deponent Radhe Shyam Singh did not join in this petition as petitioner. Obviously, he had sworn affidavit only on the alleged instructions of the petitioner. Now the two petitioners have filed I.A. No.389 of 2010 and I.A. No. 602 of 2010 stating on affidavits that they had not instructed the said Radhe Shyam Singh to file the case. Therefore, they have prayed in the interlocutory applications to allow the same and - 2 - permit them to withdraw the writ application. Mr. Dinu Kumar and Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, learned counsels, who had appeared in the writ application, submit that some statements made in I.A. No.389 of 2010 may cast aspersions against their professional conduct. This Court clarifies that in I.A. No.389 of 2010, allegations made against Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate, shall not be treated against his professional conduct. In view of this clarification, Sri Dinu Kumar has no objection to the interlocutory applications filed by the two petitioners with personal supporting affidavits. In the circumstances, I.A. Nos. 389 and 602 of 2010 filed by the two petitioners are allowed and the writ application is dismissed as withdrawn. B.T (J. N. Singh, J.)