IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.49 of 2009 AVTAR PATEL @ CHHOTU Son of Birval Singh, Resident of village Rampur Sardar @ Khokada, P.S. Goraul, District Vaishali Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3 18/04/2009 It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner’s six years old son was kidnapped on 9.4.2006 by the accused persons but he was found out on 23.3.2007 for which a case vide Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case no. 113 of 2006 was instituted. The allegation of the petitioner is that neither the accused persons were arrested nor the statement of the boy was taken in spite of the direction from this Court. It is further alleged that even though Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 113 of 2006 was filed under sections 147, 148, 149, 380, 384, 341, 323, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act but section 364 or 364-A of the Indian Penal Code was not added although in the first information report itself it was said that the boy has been kidnapped. The petitioner filed Cr. W.J.C. No. 451 of 2006 and in spite of the direction the above section was not added and the police after investigation submitted final form in the case. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 4, the Superintendent of Police, Vaishali at Hajipur stating therein that as per the direction of this Court the police has added section 363 of the Indian Penal Code in the formal first information report and re- investigation was conducted. The boy was questioned by the Investigating Officer and the case was further reviewed by the then A.S.P. Vaishali who also found the case false and supplementary final - 2 - form has been submitted in the case and prosecution report has been submitted against the informant for filing false case under section 182 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code. In the circumstances, I am of the view that if the petitioner is not satisfied with the investigation of the case and that section 364- A of the Indian Penal Code was not added, he has remedy under the Code of Criminal Procedure and, therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this writ application. This writ application is thus disposed of with the observation made above. (J. B. Koshy, CJ.) AMIN