IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.591 of 2010 DR. SHASHI BHUSHAN SINGH @ RANA DR.SHASHI BHUSHAN SINGH SON OF SRI SURENDRA PRASAD SINGH, RESIDENT OF ASSHIYANA NAGAR, PHASE – 1 KOTHI NO. 96 (A), P.S. RAJIV NAGAR, PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATNA. 2. THE CHAIRMAN STATE BANK OF INDIA, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT NARIMAN POINT BRANCH, MAKERS CHAMBER – III, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI- 400021. 3. THE ZONAL MANAGER, PATNA MAIN BRANCH BUILDING, STATE BANK OF INDIA, GANDHI MAIDAN, PATNA. 4. MR. BIPIN KRISHNA SINGH SON OF NOT KNOWN AT PRESENT WORKING AS CHIEF MANAGER (SERVICE) S.b.i. SERVICE BRANCH, SECOND FLOOR, PATNA MAIN BRANCH BUILDING, GANDHIMAIDAN, PATNA. 5. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, KHAGARIA BRANCH, DISTRICT KHAGARIA. ----------- 10. 01.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State as also learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State Bank of India. The prayer of the petitioner is for quashing the first information report bearing Gandhimaidan P.S. Case No. 59 of 2010 registered on 3rd of February 2010 for the offence under Sections 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner further prays that the Inspector of the Gandhimaidan Police Station be directed to lodge first information report against the informant of the aforesaid police case for suppressing material information. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid Gandhimaidan P.S. case no. 59 of 2010 is not being properly investigated which would be apparent that up till now police has not completed the investigation and submitted the police report despite the investigating officer was directed to make investigation of the case as per the instruction of the Deputy Superintendent of Police. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, bank official has not been cooperating with the case with regard to the passing of the cheque in respect of making payment against the cheque in question. Learned counsel for the State Bank of India submits that the bank itself is very serious with regard to the aforesaid matter and as such, it is not correct to say that the bank official is not cooperating with the investigation. It is further submitted that all the records are always open for the investigating officer to take into consideration the relevant documents, if so required, in the investigation. Considering the submission of the parties, it is expedient in the interest of justice that the investigation of the aforesaid case be completed without delay. Accordingly, it is directed that the investigation of the aforesaid Gandhimaidan P.S. Case No. 59 of 2010 be 3 completed expeditiously without unnecessary delay if not completed, and upon completion of the investigation, police report be submitted forthwith. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/ ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)