IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC NO.540 OF 2009 MANDEO PRASAD CHOUDHARY, SON OF LATE SURENDRA CHOUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE GARHI RAMPUR, P.O. NAUWAGARHI, P.S. NAYA RAMNAGER, DISTRICT MUNGER ……………………………………………………………….PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, EASTERN REGION, MUNGER. 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MUNGER 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUNGER 5. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, JAMALPUR, DISTRICT MUNGER 6. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, JAMALPUR, DISTRICT MUNGER 7. THE OFFICER-IN-INCHARGE-CUM-INVESTIGATING OFFICER OF NAYA RAMNAGER P.S. CASE NO.172/08, P.S. NAYA RAMNAGAR, DISTRICT MUNGER 8. UDAY CHAUDHARY, SON OF LATE BHOLA CHOUDHARY 9. SHAILENDRA CHOUDHARY, SON OF LATE BHOLA CHOUDHARY 10. RUBY DEVI WIFE OF BIPIN CHOUDHARY 11. PRINCE KUMAR, ON OF UDAY CHOUDHARY NO.8 TO 11 RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE GARHI RAMPUR, P.O. NAUWAGARHI, P.S. NAYA RAMNAGR, DISTRICT MUNGER ………………………………………………..…… RESPONDENTS 3 23.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has filed this writ application for a direction to the investigating agency to investigate the case properly in right earnest and arrest the accused persons. It is contended that though the case was instituted on dying declaration of a lady and - 2 - the accused persons were also identified but the police is not proceeding with the investigation as one of the accused persons is a police personnel. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Superintendent of Police, Munger in which it is stated that he supervised the case and found the case true and issued direction to the concerned Investigating Officer to arrest the accused persons. That direction appears to have been issued by the Superintendent of Police, Munger as far back as on 11.07.2009. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till now direction of the senior police officer has not been carried out. On the other hand, accused persons, who are influential and powerful, are everyday threatening the petitioner and have entered into his house and manhandled him. If the Superintendent of Police, Munger has found the case true and issued direction to the Investigating Officer to consider the case and has issued direction to the I.O. in July, 2009 itself to arrest the accused persons, the Investigating Officer ought to have acted in - 3 - right earnest and complied with the said direction. S.P. Munger was also expected to follow up and to see as to whether direction issued by him has been complied by the Investigating Officer or not. The direction was issued in July, 2009 and almost eight months have passed. It is high time that the S.P. should ensure that the direction issued by him is complied with. Petitioner is directed to approach the Superintendent of Police, Munger and point out to him that in spite of the direction, the Investigating Officer has not taken any action against the accused persons. S.P. will look into the matter and see to it that all the steps are taken by the Investigating Officer in the case in accordance with law and investigation of the case is concluded and final report is submitted at an early date for further action in the matter. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. B.T. (J.N.Singh, J.)