Patna High Court

Ravi SinghversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: ARUN KUMAR JHA

Holding

The High Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the trial court to dispose of the pending Section 156(3) application within four weeks, thereby not granting a mandamus but enforcing compliance with investigative guidelines.

Summary

Ravi Singh filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking a mandamus directing the police to conduct a proper investigation into case No.121/2016, specifically to determine whether mobile number 7301639195 belongs to him. He had earlier filed an application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) and made several representations to police officials, but alleged no satisfactory investigation. The Court referred to earlier guidelines issued in Cr.WJC No.153 of 2017 and Cr.WJC No.1072 of 2018, which outline the duties of senior police officers and magistrates in supervising investigations and addressing delays. The High Court held that the trial court had failed to act on the pending Section 156(3) application and directed it to dispose of that application within four weeks with a reasoned order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting the mandamus, but with directions to the trial court to ensure compliance with procedural requirements.

Issues considered

Whether the writ court can issue a mandamus directing the police to investigate the ownership of a mobile number in a pending criminal case.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for a proper investigation.
Whether the trial court failed to discharge its duty under the guidelines issued by the coordinate bench.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 156(3)

Subjects

writ petition
mandamus
criminal investigation
Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
police supervision
investigative delay
mobile number identification

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1206 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2016 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ravi Singh, Son of Sri Baban Singh, Resident of Village - Narullahpur, Police
Station - Shikarganj, District - East Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Superintendent Of Police East Champaran (Motihari) Bihar
3. The Officer In- Charge, Pakridayal Police Station, East Champaran Bihar
4. The Investigation Officer Pakridayal Police Station , East Champaran Bihar

... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uday Prakash Shrarma, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prashant Kumar, AC to SC-5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 19-01-2026

As prayed for, learned counsel for the petitioner is

directed to remove the defects pointed out by the office within

one week.

2. Though, today the record has been put up under the

heading ‘For Orders (On Office Notes)’, but with consent of the

parties, I intend to dispose of this petition at this stage itself.

3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.

4. The present writ petition has been filed seeking

following reliefs :-

“I. For issuance of an appropriate writ,
order, direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding and directing the respondent to make
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1206 of 2024 dt.19-01-2026
2/8

proper investigation in Pakridayal P.S. Case No.121
of 2016, specifically on the point whether mobile
number 7301639195 on the basis of which the
petitioner has been implicated in the case belongs to
the petitioner or not.
II. For any other relief which the Hon’ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case”.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner has filed an application under Section 156(3) of

Cr.P.C. before the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate-VIII, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with

Pakaridayal P.S. Case No. 121/2016 with similar prayer. Prior to

that the petitioner has made several representations to the police

authorities, namely the DIG, West Champaran vide Memo No.

922/CR dated 27.02.2021, the DGP vide letter no. 2279XL

dated 10.06.2022, letter no. 2958XL dated 14.07.2022 and letter

no. 4523XL dated 20.10.2022 and also to the investigating

officer and supervising authorities, but no proper investigation

has been made. The learned counsel further submits that the

present petition may be disposed of in the light of order dated

14.09.2022 passed by the learned Coordinate Bench in

Cr.W.J.C. No.1072 of 2018 whereby and whereunder the

learned Coordinate Bench in a writ petition filed for proper and
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1206 of 2024 dt.19-01-2026
3/8

fair investigating reiterated the guidelines issued in a batch of

writ petitions with lead case being Cr.WJC No. 153 of 2017.

The learned counsel further submits that the application filed

before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VIII,

Motihari, East Champaran is still pending, though it has been

filed on 11.07.2023.

6. Perused the record.

7. The learned Coordinate Bench while disposing of

the Cr.WJC No.153 of 2017 along with other analogous cases,

vide order dated 09.09.2022, issued following directions in

paragraphs 10 :

“(I) In the cases where the investigation of
the case is still pending, the concerned writ
petitioner/an aggrieved person (hereinafter referred to
as the ‘writ petitioner’ or ‘an aggrieved person’) may
file an appropriate application before the Senior
Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police of the
concerned district drawing his attention towards the
pending investigation. The aggrieved person shall
submit his stand by way of an application with all
supporting materials in the office of Senior
Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police or
send the same through registered post/speed post/email,
as the case may be. A copy of the same shall also be
sent to the investigating officer of the case.
(II) On receipt of such application from the
aggrieved person, the Senior Superintendent of Police/
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1206 of 2024 dt.19-01-2026
4/8

Superintendent of Police shall himself supervise the
said case within a period of two weeks, wherever
necessary he shall give a chance of hearing to the
aggrieved person and all endeavours be made to
consider the submissions as well as the materials
produced before him.
(III) The Senior Superintendent of
Police/Superintendent of Police shall issue necessary
instructions to any other supervising authority such as
Dy.S.P. and also to the I.Os. of the case to complete the
investigation from all angles within a reasonable
period. What will be the reasonable period will depend
upon the nature of the case and the kind of materials
which are required to be dealt with. It is to be kept in
mind that only because the Criminal Procedure Code
does not provide for maximum limit within which an
investigation is to be completed, it does not mean that
the investigation is to be kept pending for decades.
There are many judicial pronouncements of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in which the prosecution has been
quashed because the investigating agency failed to
complete the investigation of the case despite lapse of
several years. Undue delay in completion of
investigation erodes public faith and confidence in the
investigating agency.
(IV) Upon receipt of a request/application
/representation from a person connected with the case
and aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the investigation
alleging improper investigation, complaints of threat to
him or his family or the witnesses by his opponents,
accused or his associates, it is the Sr. Superintendent of
Police/Superintendent of Police of the concerned
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1206 of 2024 dt.19-01-2026
5/8

district and the Station House Officer of the concerned
police station as well as the I.O. of the case who would
be duty bound to enter or caused to be entered the
information in the station diary of the police station and
examine or caused to be examined the threat perception
of the informant and/or his family members/witnesses
and take appropriate steps at the earliest, in the cases
where threat perceptions are found to be genuine, they
would take immediate measures to protect the life of the
person(s) under threat. Delay in examining the
request/representation leading to any serious
consequences shall in itself be a matter of enquiry and
action against the erring police officials.
(V) As regards the grievance that accused
persons are not being arrested in cases involving
serious and heinous offences the Senior Superintendent
of Police/Superintendent of Police/Investigating Officer
shall take appropriate steps keeping in view the law and
judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court on the subject. In
the matter of absconding accused the I.O. must take
immediate steps to arrest him and exhaust all other
procedures in accordance with law with utmost
expedition.
(VI) This Court has already reproduced the
extracts from judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in the case of Sakiri Vasu (supra). In the light of the said
judgment, this Court directs that in all these cases the
learned Magistrate(s) in whose court the case is
pending, shall, without seeking any application from the
informant monitor the investigation. They are fully
competent to take a view as to whether a proper
investigation is taking place or not. Learned
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1206 of 2024 dt.19-01-2026
6/8

Magistrates are expected to exercise their powers under
Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to ensure that investigation of the
case pending before the learned Magistrate is duly
investigated. If it is found that the Investigating Officer
is not proceeding with the investigation expeditiously
and is keeping the same pending without rhyme or
reason and in the opinion of the learned Magistrate it is
found to be a case of inaction on the part of the
Investigating Officer, the learned Magistrate would be
well within his powers to direct the Senior
Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police to
change the Investigating Officer, to supervise the case
himself by the Senior Superintendent of
Police/Superintendent of Police and to take appropriate
measures in accordance with law. While exercising his
power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., the learned
Magistrate shall definitely monitor the investigation,
though he cannot investigate the case himself and will
not act as supervisory authority but it is certainly within
his domain to ensure that the investigation is done
properly and for this purpose without interfering with
the power of the Investigating Officer or the
Supervising Authority to conduct an investigation, the
learned Magistrate may issue appropriate directions
which in his opinion is required for conduct of proper
investigation. What would be the nature of such
direction(s) in a given case cannot be put in a straight
jacket formula and it is for the learned Magistrate to
look into this aspect of the matter on case to case basis.
An application filed by an aggrieved person with prior
service of copy upon the learned Public
Prosecutor/A.P.P. seeking directions for proper
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1206 of 2024 dt.19-01-2026
7/8

investigation must be heard expeditiously and the same
be disposed of within a period of 30 days from the date
on which such application is moved before the learned
Magistrate on the first date. If the learned Magistrate
fails to exercise his power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
either on his own or on filing of the application by the
aggrieved person, an appropriate application may be
brought before this Court for an order/direction and
monitoring as the case may be.
(VII) If any of the directions issued by the
learned Magistrate in accordance with the order of this
Court as stated above to the Senior Superintendent of
Police/Superintendent of Police/investigating officer,
unless otherwise interfered with by a competent court of
law, is not given effect to by the concerned authorities,
it will be taken to be a case of contempt of this Court
and the learned Magistrate may inform this Court as
regards the willful disobedience or disregard shown to
the order/orders, direction/directions issued by him in
terms of this judgment. In such circumstance an
aggrieved person may also file an application seeking
initiation of contempt.
(VIII) All the stake-holders in the present
writ applications shall act accordingly. A copy of this
order be sent to the Director General of Police, Bihar to
enable him to issue necessary instructions at the
earliest”.

8. In the guidelines, the learned trial court has been

reminded of its powers and if the application filed by the

petitioner is still pending, it shows failure to discharge its duty
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1206 of 2024 dt.19-01-2026
8/8

by the learned trial court in contravention of above-noted

guidelines (VI).

9. Therefore, the learned trial court, i.e., the

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VIII, Motihari, East

Champaran is directed to dispose of the application dated

11.07.2023 filed by the petitioner within four weeks from the

date of receipt/production of a copy of this order by passing a

reasoned and speaking order.

10. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the

present writ petition stands disposed of.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 19.01.2026
Transmission Date 19.01.2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…