IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.694 of 2007 KUMAR KARN Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3 17.9.2008 In the instant writ petition the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to hand over the key of the house of the petitioner immediately which has been kept by the Investigating Officer, Alamganj P.S. No.181 of 2007. Incidentally the petitioner’s father one Bijay Kumar Bhagat made a statement in the P.M.C.H. at 4 P.M. on 28.5.2007 alleging therein that he had two members in his family namely he and his son Kumar Karn, the petitioner. He alleged that in the morning at 4 A.M. while his son proceeded from his house to Delhi for meeting his cousin brother who stays at Delhi in connection with studies, the door of the house remained opened and someone entered his house and opened fire causing injury on his chest. He further alleged that he was residing on rental premises in the house of Satyadeo Lal since last ten years. He further alleged that he had no suspicion on anybody. After the aforesaid statement the informant died giving rise to Alamganj P.S.Case No. 181of 2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the police has conducted the investigation in most perfunctory manner and locked his premises. He submits that the land lord of the house Satyadeo Lal has been giving all sorts of wrong information to the police that the petitioner did not participate in the cremation of his father. - 2 - KHAN For deciding the issue in hand, this court would not go into the merit of the allegation or otherwise. This court for the present would not examine whether Satyadeo Lal has been giving correct information or wrong information. In the counter affidavit there is a clear statement made in paragraph 19 that the Investigating Officer has not kept the key of the premises in question. In view of the aforesaid statement, no direction can be given to the police for handing over the key of the premises in question. The situation would have been different if the police have taken the key of the premises without any authorization of law. It would be open to the petitioner to proceed in accordance with law in view of the specific statement of the police that they have not taken the key of the premises in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed Interlocutory Application for quashing of the F.I.R. This court is not inclined to entertain the Interlocutory Application as in the instant writ petition there is specific prayer for handing over possession of the key of the premises. However, it would be open to the petitioner to move appropriate application if he is aggrieved by any subsequent order. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. (S.P.Singh,J) - 3 -