IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.431 of 2011 Alok Kumar Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 2 21.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Advocate General appearing for the State. The primary grievance of the petitioner, who claims himself to a correspondent of local media namely “Seven Days Weekly” is that the petitioner has been implicated in Mali P.S. Case No. 116 of 2009 and Amba P.S. Case No. 17 of 2009 for ulterior purposes since petitioner being a local correspondents wanted certain information regarding the expenditure in Lok Sabha Election as also information regarding Hariyahi Nahar Pariyojna. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecution of the petitioner is malicious one and as such the case needs to be investigated by an independent agency. Reliance has been placed on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Binit Narain Vs. Union of India reported in (1996)2 SCC, 1999. Learned Advocate General appearing for the State submits that the submission of the petitioner that he was implicated for ulterior purpose is absolutely incorrect, as a matter of fact, upon investigating the allegations levelled have been found true and as such 2 charge-sheet has also been submitted. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to choose the agency by which the case is to be investigated. Considering the submissions of the parties, it is not in dispute that after investigation charge-sheet has been submitted. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this application and the same accordingly stands dismissed. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)