IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.4826 of 2010 Sunita Devi, wife of Late Bachcha Singh, Resident of village- Sherpur, P.O. Gaura, P.S. Marhaura, District- Saran at Chapra. . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Sri Gupteshwar Pandey, son of not known to the petitioner, Presently posted as the Inspector General of Police, Muzaffarpur Range, Muzaffarpur. . . . . . Opposite Parties. ----------- 7/ 24.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for initiation of contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for deliberate and willful disobedience of order dated 22.07.2010 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No.802 of 2009 (Sunita Devi Vs. The State of Bihar and Others). The petitioner also prays for commanding the respondent authorities to take appropriate action against the Superintendent of Police, Saran at Chapra, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Marhaura, Chapra and the Station Head Officer, Marhaura, Chapra, as they have tried to save the accused persons named in the F.I.R. and implicate the innocent persons for the alleged murder of petitioner’s husband. 3. The facts of the case is being narrated in short before I take the issue of contempt: The petitioner, Sunita Devi, lodged Marhaura P.S. case no. 92 of 2009 dated 04.06.2009 under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for murder of her husband late Bachcha Singh. In her fardbeyan, she stated that on 03.06.2009 at 5.30 P.M., her husband had gone to call labourer from near the house of Hakim Singh for sprinkling seeds in the field. Soon thereafter 2 on hearing sound of firing, she came on the main road where she saw her husband lying dead on the road. She saw three persons who were on a motorcycle, opening fire. The informant recognized two of the accused as Dr. Lal Babu Singh and his son Arun Singh of village Sherpur, P.S. Marhaurah, District- Chapra. The informant’s son and mother-in-law though not eye witness, corroborated the prosecution case. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the police did not file charge-sheet against the F.I.R. named accused Dr. Lal Babu Sing and his Son Arun Singh. The petitioner submits that the police have deliberately tried to shield the F.I.R. named accused persons and carried the investigation in wrong direction. The petitioner submits that in course of trial some witnesses have supported the involvement of F.I.R. named accused persons in the murder and the court has summoned them under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. 5. Learned counsel for the State submits that the independent witnesses stated that F.I.R. named accused persons are innocent and involvement of non-F.I.R. accused had come to the fore during investigation. These witnesses stated that on account of personal animosity, the F.I.R. named persons have been implicated in this case. The State counsel submitted that Dr. Lal Babu Singh, who is named in the F.I.R. is aged about 70 years. He further submits that after investigation charge-sheet has been submitted against non-F.I.R. named accused persons and Final Form has been submitted in favour of F.I.R. named 3 accused persons. 6. The petitioner / informant had raised grievance that innocent persons are being implicated and persons involved are being let off. By way of an abundant precaution that any one involved may not go scot free, I observed that if the petitioner makes a fresh representation before the Inspector General of Police Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur regarding the alleged slip shod manner in which the investigation proceeded, he would examine the same and if finds that there is substance in the allegation of the petitioner, appropriate steps would be taken in the matter. 7. The petitioner has now filed the instant contempt application for alleged willful violation of order dated 22.07.2010, passed in Cr.W.J.C. No. 802 of 2009. The petitioner submits that she had even filed complaint before the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna regarding the alleged connivance of the district police official including the then Superintendent of Police, Chapra. The State has filed show-cause and submits that Inspector General Of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur after examining and enquiring the matter found that there is no substance in the allegation that the district police official connived with the named accused persons and implicated innocent persons. It was stated in the report of the Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur that the house of the F.I.R. named accused persons and the informant are in the neighbourhood and many civil disputes is going on between 4 them. The copy of the detailed review report contained in Memo No. 343/C.R. dated 03.02.2011 of Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzafarpur is annexed as Annexure-B to the show-cause. 8. I find that Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur has looked into the grievance of the petitioner and found that the allegation levelled by the informant is not correct. In his report, the Inspector General of Police, Tirhut Range, Muzafarpur noticed that the independent witnesses stated that the informant reached the place of occurrence after the incident and did not reveal any name. These witnesses stated that at the instigation of some villagers, the informant named as accused the persons mentioned in the F.I.R. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find that the petitioner has made out a case for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite parties. 10. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)