IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. W.J.C. No.267 of 2010 KRISHNA KUMAR SINGH, son of Parmanand Singh @ Parma Singh, resident of Village-Tippa, P.S. Nauhatta, District Rohtas. ---Petitioner Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Director General of Police-Cum-Inspector General, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram, Dehri-on-Sone. 4. The Station House Officer,Nauhatta, District- Rohtas. 5. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Jharkhand State, Ranchi. 6. The Superintendent of Police, Daltonganj, District Palamu, Jharkhand. 7. The Officer-in-Charge, Chhatarpur, District Palamu. 8. Pradeep Singh, son of Kamta Singh, resident of Village Tippa, P.S. Nauhatta, District Rohtas. ---Respondents ----------- 2. 9.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents except respondent no.8. The petitioner submits that respondent no.8 is an absconder in Chhatarpur P.S. Case No.72/1983, G.R. No.917/83/Tr. No.1199/03 pending in the court of the S.D.J.M., Daltonganj, Palamu. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being a citizen of the country is entitled to see that the aforesaid trial is concluded without delay. Although warrant of arrest has been issued against respondent no.8 by the court of the S.D.J.M., Daltonganj, Palamu, and the same has been sent for its execution to the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas, but it is not being executed; with the result the trial is getting delayed. - 2 - Learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand submits that as per the statement of the petitioner that the warrant has been issued by the court of the S.D.J.M., Daltonganj and sent to respondent no.3 for its execution, the Superintendent of Police, Daltonganj has now nothing to do presently. Learned counsel appearing for the State of Bihar submits that if the warrant of arrest has been issued by the court of S.D.J.M., Daltonganj and the same has not been executed, appropriate order, if any, could be passed by the S.D.J.M., Daltonganj for execution of the warrant although the copy of the warrant, which is said to have been issued, has not been annexed with the writ application. Considering the submissions of the parties, it does not appear firstly, whether the warrant has been executed or not since the copy of the said order has not been annexed nor the order issuing the warrant of arrest. Secondly, the petitioner, if at all is interested to see that the prosecution of the accused persons of the aforesaid case is concluded without delay, he ought to have taken appropriate steps bringing it to the notice of the prosecuting agency of the said case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any merit in this writ application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)