IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1189 of 2010 NARSINGh SWAIN SON OF LATE GOPI NATH SWAIN, THE CHIEF MANAGER, UCO BANK, EXHIBITION ROAD BRANCH, P.S. GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTRICT – PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATNA. 5. THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, GANDHI MAIDAN POLICE STATION, PATNA 6. THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER, GANDHI MAIDAN POLICE STATION, PATNA 7. MR. RAJESH KUMAR SON OF MR. NAND KISHORE SINGH, PROPRIETOR OF M/S JAI MATA DI, RAJKUMAR PLACE, OPP. TULSI APARTMENT, GOVIND MITRA ROAD, R/O- MIG 2/44, SECTOR 7 BAHADUR HOUSING COLONY, KANKARBAGH, DISTRICT PATNA. 8. MR. MANOJ KUMAR SON OF MR. INDRA KANT MISHRA, R/O- 496 SACHIVALAYA COLONY KANKARBAGH DISTRICT PATNA. 9. MR. SUNIL PRASAD SON OF LATE RAJENDRA PRASAD, PROPRIETOR M/S TYRE IMPORIUM, EXHIBITION ROAD CROSSING PATNA R/0 ROAD NO. 84, ASHOK NAGAR, KANKARBAGH, PATNA. 10. LAL DEO PRASAD. 11. LAL BIHARI PRASAD BOTH SONS OF RAM RATAN PRASAD, R/O- VILLAGE ISHOPUR, PS. PHULWARI DISTRICT PATNA. 12. SMT. PRIYA JAISWAL W/O- SHAILESH KUMAR, PROPRIETOR M/S INDIA MOTORS, R/O- RAGHUVANSH MARKET, EXHIBITION ROAD, PATNA. 13. SMT. INDU BALA W/O- ANAND KUMAR R/O- ARYA KUMAR ROAD, MACHHUATOLI, DISTRICT PATNA. ----------- 02. 16.03.2011 Heard the parties. The grievance of the petitioner is that the investigation of Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 366 of 2008, in which the respondent nos. 7 to 13 and others are accused, is not being investigated properly. It is submitted that the aforesaid case was lodged by the informant who happens to be the Chief Manager, UCO Bank alleging the commission of the offences on the part of the accused persons as per the aforesaid first information report. Copy of the first information report has been annexed as Annexure -1. It is further submitted that even though the materials have come against the accused persons and also despite issuance of warrant of arrest against some of the accused persons they are not being apprehended. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4 stating therein that the investigation of the case is properly done and the case is being supervised by the higher police officials. It is further stated that some of the accused persons as mentioned in paragraph -5 of the counter affidavit, have surrendered in the court below and were granted bail. Considering the submission of the parties, it goes without saying that the aforesaid police case needs to be investigated expeditiously without unnecessary delay and upon completion of the investigation, the police may submit the report in accordance with law. As regards the grievance of the petitioner that the Investigating Officer of the case was not investigated the matter properly. It will be open for the petitioner to bring it to the notice of the respondent no. 4 in this regard who will look into the matter as per the law. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)