IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.943 of 2009 JAI PRAKASH SINGH, Son of late Rajdeo Singh, Resident of village- Mathura, P.S.- Bidupur, District- Vaishali. . . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Home Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Vaishali at Hazipur. 4. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Sadar Hazipur, District- Vaishali at Hajipur. 5. The Officer-in-charge, Bidupur Police Station, District- Vaishali at Hajipur. . . . . . . Respondents. ----------- 3/ 05.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. In the instant writ application, the petitioner prays for fair investigation in Bidupur P.S. case no. 304 of 2009. The aforesaid case was instituted on the fardbeyan of Sudarsan Devi. She stated that on 12.09.2009 at 6.30 P.M., one Santosh Kumar took her son, Kunal Kumar, aged about 18 years, from her house. At 7.00 P.M. Santosh Kumar came to her house and informed Damodar Singh that informant’s son Kunal Kumar had fallen into his well. Thereafter the informant and others rushed to the well and took out his dead body. The informant found that the neck of her son have been cut by a sharp cutting weapon. She states that her field is adjacent to that of Santosh Kumar and there is land dispute with respect to the said land. At the relevant time, (elder brother of petitioner) Jwala Singh, this petitioner and father of Santosh were around, when latter had taken out her son. Learned counsel submits that petitioner stays at Bihar Sharif and is engaged in business. He has been implicated in this case, on account of land dispute and suspicion. Learned counsel submits that 2 Superintendent of Police, Vaishali has given certain directions to the investigating officer in his supervision report dated 17.04.2010. Learned counsel submits that as the petitioner apprehends false implication in this case, the matter may be supervised by Superintendent of Police, Vaishali himself. Counsel for the State submits that investigation is going on and the case is being supervised by Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Sadar, Vaishali. Having heard the counsel for the parties, this Court observes that the investigation be conducted under the overall supervision of Superintendent of Police, Vaishali. Furthermore, the investigation should conclude preferably within a period of six months from today. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)