IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ No.33 of 2011 Sanjay Kumar Versus The State Of Bihar And Ors. ---------------------------------- 5/ 17/11/ 2011 The State is none represented. Heard Mr. Chhittaranjan Sinha, Sr. Adv on behalf of the petitioner. This case happens to be of prime importance as local administration is indirectly involved and that led transfer of Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 177/07 from the police to CID vide Cr.Writ No. 1058/07, order dated 19.1.2009. Two conditions were incorporated in the aforesaid order, the first one, that the investigation should be concluded within six months from the date of receipt of order and the other, till submission of final report, no coercive step should be taken against Dr. Ashok Kumar & Ors. The aforesaid Cr.Writ was preferred by Dr. Ashok Kumar himself wherein petitioner of this petition appeared and was allowed as an intervenor. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf 2 of the State at earlier occasion. First the successive I.Os. were made responsible in causing delay in getting the investigation completed within the stipulated period so fixed by the order referred above. Those two I.Os, it appears that have been made scapegoat. Then the 3rd I.O. was substituted who happens to be B.D. Nigam, Dy. S.P. who unfortunately died and for the present Sri Krishna Gopal Kumar, Dy.S.P. CID happens to be the investigating authority. It has then been disclosed that he could not received the case diary and other relevant materials and to facilitate the same Ram Balak Das, S.I. of CID has been sent to the permanent residence of deceased, B.D. Nigam to trace out the relevant papers/document/case diary etc. From the pleadings of the respective parties it is evident that substantial, sufficient time has been consumed by the authority by which there has been utter violation of the court’s order whereunder by transferring the investigation to CID, had bounded the investigation with time slot. For the present, the State cannot escape from its responsibility apart from the fact 3 that it is an obligation on the State as well as its machinery to abide with the direction of the Court. In violation thereof will certainly make them liable for contempt. None of the authorities cared or sensitized towards the direction of the Court nay prayed before the Court for extension of the time. The whole thing was leisurely conducted and that is itself evident from the counter affidavit. Though the conduct of the authorities concerned would have attracted some more severe stricture but before that, an opportunity is being given to the authorities concerned to complete the investigation within three months and submit final report otherwise they will be held accountable for the negligence of the order of the Court. Let a copy of this order be served upon GA-6 for its compliance. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed of. perwez ( Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)