Disposed

Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Jha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC7 Feb 2014CR. WJC/1163/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal writ petition, the petitioner, an accused in a police case alleged to stem from a civil property dispute, sought directions to police to review prior court orders before taking action. The High Court held that examining document impacts falls outside writ jurisdiction and disposed of the petition by granting liberty to place documents before the Investigating Officer.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to place documents before the Investigating Officer; petition disposed of.

Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Jha Vs The State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1163 of 2012 (3) dt.07-02-2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ No.1163 of 2012

¶3

====================================================== SANTOSH KUMAR @ SANTOSH JHA, S/O SRI BHAGWAN LAL JHA, RESIDENT OF SANGI, P.S.GHOGHARDIHA, DISTRICTMADHUBANI, .... .... PETITIONER/S

¶4

VERSUS

¶5

1. THE STATE OF BIHAR

¶6

2. THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA

¶7

3. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATNA SADAR, (SACHIVALAYA)

¶8

5. THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE, PATLIPUTRA POLICE STATION, PATNA

¶9

6. THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER, PATLIPUTRA P.S. CASE NO. 179 OF 2010, PATLIPUTRA, PATNA.

¶10

.... .... RESPONDENT/S

¶11

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 07-02-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

¶13

learned AC to GA-3.

¶14

Petitioner who happens to be an accused in Patliputra P.S. Case No.179 of 2010 has prayed for following reliefs:-

¶15

i) For a direction to the respondent authorities particularly respondent no.5 and 6 to look the orders passed by this Hon’ble Court in Cr.W.J.C. No.600 of 2010 as contained in Annexure-4, 4/A, 5 & 7 as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court before taking any action against the petitioner who has been named in the First Information Report only for civil dispute;

¶16

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1163 of 2012 (3) dt.07-02-2014

¶17

ii) For a direction to respondent no.5 not to take any coercive step against the petitioner as the First Information Report is only a counter blast to the sale effected by rightful owner of the property which was being claimed by the informants;

¶18

iii) For a direction to the Respondent, Senior Superintendent of Police to pass final order on the representation filed by the erstwhile owner of the land in view of one of the order of Hon’ble Court dated 16.08.2010 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No.600 of 2010; and for any other relief(s) for which the petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

¶19

By referring Annexure-3, the sale deed executed by one Dr. Shankaranand Upadhaya in favour of Shri Balaji Steeol Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Patna which is of dated 10.11.2010 whereupon petitioner stood as a witness has submitted that virtually he happens to be a property dealer and being satisfied with the legal identity of vendor duly acknowledged by the Hon’ble Apex Court, he had negotiated and got the Annexure-3 finalized which has irked the informant of Patliputra P.S. Case No.179 of 2010, namely, Gauri Shankar Pathak, Shankar Pathak,

¶20

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1163 of 2012 (3) dt.07-02-2014

¶21

Prem Shankar Pathak whereupon instant case has been registered even implicating the petitioner without having specific allegation against him.

¶22

It has also been submitted that petitioner has simply prayed for having direction to respondent no.5 as well as 6, the Investigating Officer of Patliputra P.S. Case No.179 of 2010 to go through the relevant judgments, orders so annexed under instant appeal as Annexure-4, 4/A, 5 & 7 before concluding the investigation.

¶23

The aforesaid exercise could be taken up by the petitioner at an earlier occasion himself by transmitting those documents through postal process in case is not bailed out, or by tendering in case having been enlarged on bail. What repercussion those documents will have in consonance with the allegation during course of investigation is out of purview of writ jurisdiction.

¶24

Giving the liberty to the petitioner to place the document if he so desires before the Investigating Officer, instant petition is disposed of.

¶25

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)

¶26

PN/-

Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Jha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Jha v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nandlal Das and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar

Meena Devi Vs the State of Bihar

Rajendra Sonar and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Home Dept. police and Ors.

Ram Udar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shane Ilahi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.