IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1325 of 2010 KONGRESS BELDAR SON OF LATE ROHAN BELDAR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SINDUARA, POLICE STATION CHANDI, DISTRICT NALANDA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR PATNA 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NALANDA 4. THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE CHANDI POLICE STATION CHANDI DISTRICT NALANDA 5. JIWAN PASWAN @ RAM JIWAN PASWAN SON OF KISHORI PASWAN. 6. NAGINA PASWAN SON OF BHATTU PASWAN. 7. DHURI PASWAN SON OF RAMDEO PASWAN. 8. ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SINDUARA, POLICE STATION CHANDI, DISTRICT NALANDA. ----------- 02. 25.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though the conviction of the respondent nos. 5 to 7 for the offences under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act has been affirmed by this court as per its order dated 26th of July 2007 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 89 of 1988 (Jiwan Paswan @ Ram Jiwan Paswan and four others Versus State of Bihar), the respondent nos. 5 to 7 have not been apprehended to complete the investigation. Learned counsel for the State submits that the necessary steps have been taken for apprehending the accused persons, however, petitioner, if at all has any grievance, he ought to have approached the Trial Court instead of filing the present writ application. Considering the submission of the parties, it will be open for the petitioner, who happens to be the informant of this case, to approach the respondent nos. 3 and 4 with respect to the grievances as highlighted in the writ application. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)