HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Coram: Hon' ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra, & Hon' ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar, JJ Writ PetitSion (HC) No. 1084 of 2010 Petitioner Respondents Vs. 1. 2. 3. 4. Lekhram Mohalia, aged about 48 years, son of Shri Pyare Lal Mohilia, Caste Lodhi, R/o. Village Barbaspur, Post Uperva, P.S. Ghumka, Tehsil and Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Home Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG).\ Superintendent of Police, Rajnandgaon, Dist. Rajnandgaon Station House Officer, Police Station Ghumka, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). Thaneshwari Bai W/o. Lekhram Mohalia, aged about 43 years, r/o. village Poplatola, Jattadah, Tehsil - Dondilohara, Distt. Durg (CG). (g) (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Present: Shri Ashok Vaishnav, counsel for the petitioner. Shri U.N.S. Deo, Govt. Advocate for the State. Oral Order (Passed on this 17th day of March, 2010) Per Dhirendra Mishra. J. The petitioner has filed the second petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India for direction to the respondents to produce his missing daughter namely Suman Mohalia. Earlier writ petition (Cr) No. 5460 of 2007 of the petitioner was disposed of vide order dated 6-11-2009 with the following observation. "Taking into consideration the report dated 3-7-2009 filed by the State and documents annexed along with the report, we find that all possible efforts are being made by the Policeto investigate the matter. In these circumstances, we direct the petitioner as also respondent No.4 to cooperate with the investigation and bring to the notice of the Investigating Officer any evidence which they come across with respect to the whereabouts of the missing girl and accused Hitesh Sahu." 2) The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner only on the ground that the aforesaid order was passed on the basis of wrong statement made on behalf of the State that the application for permission to, conduct Narco test upon respondent No. 4 is pending before the competent Court whereas on the date of passing ofthe order, the application was dismissed and the State did not take any action against the order of dismissal of their application for conducting Narco test. 3) Shri Ashok Vaishnav, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that after disposal of the aforesaid petition, the Police is not taking any steps to search the missing girl only on the pretext that the petition stands dismissed by the High Court. 4) However, on specific query from the Court, whether any new facts have emerged within the knowledgeof the petitioner, which he has brought to the notice of theconcerned Police Station which would be helpful in tracing the missing girl, it is answered in negative. 5) From perusal of the order dated 6-11-2009 we observe that the petitioner himself was satisfied that the steps taken by the Police for tracing the missing girl were adequate and no new facts have been brought to the notice of the ^ ^ ^ concerned Police Station by the petitioner which may^helpful in tracing the missing girl. 6) In any case, taking into consideration the earlier direction passed by this Court, we hope that the Police shall make earnest efforts to do the needful to trace the girl with the help of the petitioner herein. 7) With the above observations, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishar Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge