IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ No.43 of 2011 Abdullah Versus The Union Of India & Ors ---------------------------------- 5 15.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for Union of India. There happens to be controversy over citizenship of petitioner which led institution of Birpur P.S. Case No. 13 of 1995. According to petitioner, supported with an annexures, he happens to be Indian citizen and so no offence where under case has been registered, charge sheet has been submitted, cognizance has been taken, is made out and so he has prayed for quashing of the FIR of Birpur P.S. Case No.13 of 1995. At the other hand, learned State counsel has submitted that with the connivance of local inhabitants of their own community, while illegally staying within the Indian territory, petitioner got the relevant documents after duping the authorities concerned. Though at previous occasion there was direction to place the real fact, Union of India failed to respond positively. Their carelessness gone to such extent that no counter affidavit has been filed on their behind. It is a matter of regret when the court is in seisin of the matter and directs so. It virtually tantamount to flout the order of the court and must be seriously looked into. Accordingly, a copy of this order be sent to the concerned for punctual compliance in future. After all the case relates with regard to an intruder. As claimed by prosecution he was not at all permitted by the Union of 2 India by issuing valid documents in his favour. After all the interest of nation is involved which should be considered above all taking extraordinary steps to get the outsider adequately dealt with. Be that as it may, sorrow affairs happens to be that the matter is pending since 1995 and as communicated by learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned court below is sitting tight over his prayer for discharge. The apathetic approach of prosecution is also of serious concern. Accordingly, the learned court is directed to take into account, the submission raised on behalf of petitioner and will decide the issue by next date positively. The learned Sessions Judge Saharsa is hereby directed to keep the surveillance over the proceeding so that it should sail smoothly. With the aforesaid observation instant petition is disposed of. Office is directed to comply accordingly. PN (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)