IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1307 of 2010 ANIL KUMAR MISHRA SON OF SRI UPENDRA NATH MISHRA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – MAHUA SADAPUR, P.O. AND P.S. MAHUA, DISTRICT VAISHALI. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. HOME COMMISSIONER, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SASARAM, DISTRICT ROHTAS. 5. UMESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI SON OF SRI DURGA DATT TRIPATHI, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA – GAURAKSHNI, PREM CHANDRA ROAD, P.S. SASARAM TOWN, DISTRICT ROHTAS. AR PRESENT AN ADVOCATE CIVIL COURT, PATNA SAHIB DISTRICT SIRMAUR (HIMACHAL PRADESH). 6. KAMLESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI SON OF DURGA DATT TRIPATHI. 7. SUPRIYA TRIPATHI WIFE OF KAMLESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF MOHALLA – GAURAKSHANI, PREM CHANDRA ROAD, P.S. SASARAM TOWN DISTRICT ROHTAS. ----------- 02. 28.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that on account of dowry death of his sister, Sasaram Town P.S. Case No. 113 of 2005 has been registered in which upon investigation of the case accused persons were charge sheeted. However, on the request of the Investigation officer further investigation was allowed and thereafter, on account of the further investigation, 2 out of 8 charge sheeted accused persons, 3 named accused persons were not sent up for trial. As such, petitioner filed a protest petition. Learned counsel for the State submits that during investigation sufficient materials were found and out of 8 accused persons, 3 accused persons namely, Umesh Chandra Tripathi, Kamlesh Chandra Tripathi and Supriya Tripathi were not sent up for trial. Considering the submission of the parties, I am not inclined to interfere with the matter and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, during the investigation, if any, materials is found against any of the accused persons, it will be open for the informant to take appropriate steps as provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Jagdish/ ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)