IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1241 of 2008 RAHUL RAJ, S/o. Harishankar Prasad Sinha, r/o. Mohalla- Vaishakhi Ram Lane, Motijheel, P.S. Town, District- Muzaffarpur. ------------- Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 2. The Deputy Inspector General of Police Tirhut Range, Muzaffarpur, 3. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, 4. The Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur, 5. The Thana Incharge, town Thana, Muzaffarpur, 6. Satya Narayan Lal S/o. late Bishwanath Prasad, 7. Sanjay Kumar Lal, 8. Ashok Kumar Lal, 9. Vikram Kumar lal, 10. Ranjit Kumar Lal, Nos.7 to 10 are sons of Satya Narayan Lal, 11. Virendra Kumar, S/o. not known to the petitioner (servant), 7 to 11 are r/o. Mohalla- Ayodhya Pd. Lane Champaran, House Randayji Gali, Motijheel, P.S. Town, District- Muzaffarpur. --------- Respondents. Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate, Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. Anil Kumar Verma, A.C. to S.C.-3. ----------- 02 31.03.2009 This petition has been filed with a prayer for issuing a direction to the respondent police authorities to investigate the case and give protection to life and property of the petitioner from respondent Nos.6 to 11, who are stated to be anti-social element. The petitioner filed complaint No.2995 of 2008 against respondent Nos.6 to 11 alleging offences under Sections 323, 324, 392, 394, 504, 2 147 & 149 of the I.P.C. as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act. It was alleged in the complaint that these respondents were forcibly trying to get possession of petitioner’s shop land and property and they were also involved in assaulting the petitioner. The respondents have filed counter affidavit wherein it is stated that the petitioner’s aforesaid plaint was sent for institution of a case under Section 156 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that accordingly Muzaffarpur Town P.S. Case No. 488 of 2008 was instituted and investigation commenced. Further submission is that the case was also supervised by the Dy.S.P. Annexure-A to the counter-affidavit is the supervision note dated 29.01.2009 of the Dy.S.P., Muzaffarpur. Referring to the supervision note, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that a detailed supervision was made by the Dy.S.P. and he found it a case of civil dispute and he directed the I.O. for submitting the final form reporting the 3 case involving civil dispute. It is submitted that final form to the effect civil dispute is going to be filed soon. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that when it is a case of civil dispute and any criminal offence has not been found in police investigation, there does not remain any scope for passing any order as prayed by the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner has other effective remedies available under law inasmuch as he can file protest petition against the final form and the protest petition will be registered as complaint and the petitioner will be examine on solemn affirmation and thereafter his case will proceed as a complaint case. In such view of the matters, there being nothing at this stage and further alternative and effective remedy being already available, I find no scope for passing any order as prayed for. Therefore, the application is dismissed. Mkr. (C.M. Prasad, J.)