IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.60 of 2008 JAGDISH MAHTO Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioner:Mr. AshoK Kumar. For the State :Mr.Manoj Kumar Sinha,J.C. to G.P.I. 2 5.12.2008 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is the informant of Malsalami P. S. Case No.190 of 2006 under section 365 of I.P.C. He alleges that his daughter-in-law, namely, Anju Devi and one Yogendra Mahto, sister’s husband, and others have kidnapped her son, namely, Amar Nath Mehta, and murdered him. The petitioner’s case is that the police has heavily relied upon the version of Anju Devi who is an accused in this case. It is submitted that statement of Anju Devi that the petitioner’s son, Amar Nath Mehta, had all on a sudden disappeared from Delhi Railway Station, is suspicious. There was no occasion for him to move to Panipat for service as even according to accused, he was sufficiently well off. He states that no sanaha was lodged by Anju Devi about his missing from Delhi Railway station. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a complaint was lodged after delay of five months and police is not properly investigating the case. The state submits that police is taking all possible steps and has even tried to flash his photo through media. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel this Court makes the following order : 2 The police will take all steps to find the clue regarding disappearance of Amarnath Mehta. If the informant is aggrieved with investigation it will be open to him to file representation before superior police official who would examine the same.The police would also take all steps for arresting the accused involved in this case. With the aforesaid directions and observation this writ application is disposed of. Anilksinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)