IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC NO.695 OF 2009 1. SHAILENDRA KUMAR CHAUDHARY 2. UDAY CHAUDHARY, BOTH SONS OF LATE BHOLA CHAUDHARY 3. RUBY DEVI, WIFE OF BIPIN CHAUDHARY @ BIPIN KUMAR CHAUDHARY, 4. PRINCE KUMAR, SON OF UDAY CHAUDHARY, ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE GARHI RAMPUR, P.S. NAYA RAM NAGAR, DISTRICT MUNGER……………………………………………………………PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BHAGALPUR 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MUNGER 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUNGER, DISTRICT MUGNER 6. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, JAMALPUR, DISTRICT MUNGER 7. THE STATION HEAD OFFICER, NAYA RAM NAGAR POLICE STATION, DISTRICT MUNGER 8. THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER OF NAYA RAM NAGAR P.S. CASE NO.172 OF 2008, P.S. NAYA RAM NAGAR, DISTRICT MUNGER………………………………………………………..RESPONDENTS ------ 2 10.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners are accused in Naya Ram Nagar P.S. Case No.172 of 2008. They have filed this writ application raising a grievance that the investigating officer is not proceeding in right earnest and on correct angles and relevant aspects of the case have been ignored during investigation. - 2 - This Court in a writ jurisdiction cannot go into the matter to examine details of the investigation and steps taken by the Investigating Officer. A counter affidavit has been filed. Learned counsel for the State states that the Superintendent of Police, Munger himself has investigated the case and found the case true. Petitioners will be at liberty to raise any grievance before the higher police authority including the Inspector General of Police, Bhagalpur pointing out the vital aspects of the case which stands ignored by the Investigating Officer during investigation. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. B.T (J. N. Singh, J.)