IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 652 of 2011. Decided on: July 7, 2011. Shakuntla Vrs. State of H.P. & ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner: Mr. Jagat Paul, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. R.K.Bawa, AG, with Mr. J.K.Verma, Dy. AG, for respondents No. 1 to 3. Mr. H.K.Paul, Advocate, for respondents No. 4 to 8. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The Writ Petition is filed mainly with the following prayer: “a. That the respondents no. 1 to 3 may kindly be directed to register an FIR and those who are responsible for the death of the deceased Pushap Lata may kindly be bring to law.” 2. Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court Sh. Hardesh Bisht, Superintendent of Police has taken up the investigation himself. It is seen from the report filed on 22.6.2011 that the investigation has been completed and final report under Section 173(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been filed before the JMIC, Kandaghat on 20.6.2011. 3. This is a case where the petitioner has been complaining that the investigation in the case has not been conducted properly. Pursuant to directions issued by this Court only, the investigation has been taken over by the Superintendent of Police. Now that Sh. Hardesh Bisht has taken over the investigation, it appears the same could be completed within the shortest possible time. We do not want to express any opinion as to the investigation conducted or result thereof. It is for the parties or for that matter, the State, as the case may be, to pursue the matter before the learned Magistrate Court in case any further steps are required in the matter. 4. Learned counsel for the 4th respondent submits that his application for bail has not been considered by the Court on account of the pendency of the Writ Petition. This Court had made it clear in the order dated 11.5.2011 that the 2 pendency of the Writ Petition shall not stand in the way of the Court considering any application in accordance with law. In case the 4th respondent is otherwise entitled to bail under law, the pendency of the Writ Petition alone shall not be a reason for not considering the application for bail. 5. The Writ Petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. July 7, 2011. ( Justice V.K.Sharma ), (karan/vs) Judge.