IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.129 of 2009 PHANISHWAR KUMAR @ SHANKAR MAHTO SON OF SRI RAM SWARUP MAHTO, RESIDENT OF GARI BISHANPUR, P.S. PIRI BAZAR (SURAJGARHA), DISTRICT LAKHISARAI. …….PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MUNGER, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, LAKHISARAI 6. SURENDRA GIRI SON OF NOT KNOWN, THE THEN OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, PIRI BAZAR (SURAJGARHA), DISTT.- LAKHISARAI 7. THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, PIRI BAZAR (SURAJGARHA), DISTRICT LAKHISARAI 8. BISHO PASWAN SON OF LATE BINO PASWAN-CHAWKIDAR, PIRI BAZAR, P.S. (SURAJGARHA), DISTRICT LAKHISARAI 9. GHANSHYAM TIWARY SON OF LATE NITYANAND TIWARY, DAFADAR, P.S. PIRI BAZAR (SURAJGARHA), DISTRICT LAKHISARAI ……RESPONDENTS. ----------- 3/ 22.06.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No one appears on behalf of the State. The petitioner is the informant of Piri Bazar (Surajgarha) P.S. case no. 184 of 2007 registered under Section 366 A of the I.P.C. for kidnapping of his minor daughter namely Nitu Bharti @ Seema Kumari by Rabish Paswan, son of Bisho Paswan, the local Chowkidar. Learned counsel submits that the police being led with the local Chowkidar, filed charge-sheet only against Rabish Paswan. However, on protest cognizance has been taken against the other accused persons. Learned counsel further submits that after filing of the instant case, the family members of the accused began to file false case against the petitioner so that he may not pursue the criminal prosecution against Rabish Paswan and others. Learned counsel - 2 - submits that the accused persons have filed Munger Harijan P.S. case No. 65 of 2007 and Piri Bazar (Surajgarha) P.S. case no. 62 of 2008. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the same be reinvestigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation or Crime Investigation Department. He submits that in this respect, he has also filed representations before the superior police official. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find that the petitioner has made out any case for reinvestigation. However, if he files representation before the Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai and the latter finds that the representation contains sufficient materials, he may direct for further investigation in the aforesaid case, so that the petitioner may not be unnecessarily harassed for filing case against the son of the local Chowkidar. With the aforesaid observation, this application is disposed of. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)