IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.647 of 2007 SANTOSH KUMAR, Son of Ram Chandra Nisad, Resident of Muhalla – Nadraganj, Mullah Toli, Police Station – Civil Lines Gaya, District – Gaya. ………………………………….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Home Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariate, Patna. 3. The Director General of Police, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Inspector General of Police, Work In charge Police Head Quarter, Patna. 5. The Superintendent of Police, Gaya, District – Gaya. 6. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Town, District – Gaya. 7. The Officer- In- Charge, Police Station, Civil Line Gaya, District Gaya. ……………………………………… Respondents ----------- 9 18.02.2009 The petitioner filed an application for directing the respondents to make inquiry by any other agency of Gaya Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 67 of 2006 dated 11.03.3006 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act and 3/5 of the Explosive Substance Act and other cases. He submits that earlier the petitioner’s uncle had filed Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 269 of 2005 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 26/27 of the Arms Act against the accused persons. Thereafter by way of retaliation, they have filed many false cases against the petitioner and his family members. Learned counsel states that Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna vide his letter dated 18.05.2006 directed Superintendent of Police Gaya to make an enquiry in respect of Town Civil Lines Gaya P. S. Case No. 67 of 2006. In view of petition filed by Santosh Kumar, the aforesaid instruction was reiterated in letter dated 31.08.2006 of - 2 - Deputy Inspector General, Administration, Bihar, Patna addressed to Superintendent of Police, Gaya. Thereafter Superintendent of Police Gaya vide his letter no. 34 of 2008 addressed to Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya. sought permission for conducting polygraphy test on the witnesses. It appears that C.J.M., Gaya vide his order dated 5.5.2007 merely recorded the view of the witnesses that they do not want to go for polygraphy test. It appears from the order dated 5.5.2007 C.J.M., Gaya that he has not adjudicated the matter whether permission for polygraphy test be allowed or disallowed. In this view of the matter, this case is remitted back to C.J.M., Gaya for taking fresh decision on application filed by S.P., Gaya contained in Annexure 13 in accordance with law expeditiously. With the above observation, this application is disposed of. Kundan (S. P. Singh, J.)