IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.326 of 2009 NAWAL KISHORE VATS @ NARAD SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 04.08.2009 The prayer in this writ application as made by the petitioner is for issuance of a direction to the respondents not to arrest, torture, disturb and humiliate the petitioner and his family members by the respondent nos. 5 and 6, the police authorities due to criminal act of petitioner’s son namely, Vivek Ranjan since petitioner has no concern with his said son. It is stated in the petition that in the year 2001 the petitioner’s son Vivek Ranjan came in the company of bad elements and indulged into criminal activities. Due to this, the other joint family members started humiliating the petitioner. It is further stated that the petitioner has partitioned his property from his other joint family members and his son Vivek Ranjan was also given his share and was separated. It is also stated that the petitioner came to know that his son Vivek Ranjan was an accused in Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 65 of 2002 under Section 395 and 364 of the Indian Penal Code and also other criminal cases. Petitioner states that Jehanabad police had come to his house and had asked whereabouts of his son Vivek Ranjan and had threatened that if whereabouts are not disclosed, he would face dire consequences. It is also stated that in execution of - 2 - processes against his son Vivek Ranjan, police has attached properties which does not belong to Vivek Ranjan but which is petitioner’s property. Any specific act of torture, harassment or humiliation is not disclosed in the petition. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondent nos. 4 and 6 i.e. Superintendent of Police and Officer-in- charge, Jehanabad who have denied that any act of torture and harassment has been done to the petitioner. The learned Standing counsel says that so far petitioner’s grievance about attachment of properties is concerned; the petitioner may get his grievance redressed by filing a petition under Section 84 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Thus hearing and on consideration of the averment in the petition and the counter affidavit and on finding that any specific instance or incident of any torture and harassment is not being disclosed, I do not find any scope for granting any relief to the petitioner as prayed for. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed as such. (C.M. Prasad, J.) Ravi/-