IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2541 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-501 Year-2024 Thana- SURSAND District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Varun Kumar S/o Chhathu Prasad R/o ward no. 4, vill - Bathnaha Purvi, P.S. - Bathnaha, Distt.- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar Bihar 2. The Director General of Police, bihar 3. The Addtional Chief Secretary, Health Deptt., Govt. of Bihar Patna 4. The Superintendent of Police Sitamarhi 5. The Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Sitamarhi Bihar 6. The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Sitamarhi Bihar 7. The Circle Officer, Sursand, Sitamarh Bihar 8. The Medical Officer, Community Health Centre (CHC), Bairgania, Sitamarhi Bihar 9. The SHO Police Station Bairgania, Sitamarhi Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajnish Shandilya For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vivek Prasad, G.P.7 Mr. Aman Priyadarshini, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 05-05-2025 Heard the parties. 2. By way of this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- (i) To quash the FIR of Sursand Police Station Case No. 501/2024 registered under section 316(2), 318(4), 271, 272, 125, 61(2), 3(5) of the BNS Act 2023 & Section 30(3), 30(2) of the Clinical Establishment Act 2013 & Section 3B of the Pre-Conception & Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act 1994, registered against the petitioner & Ors. Patna High Court CR. WJC No.2541 of 2024(2) dt.05-05-2025 2/2 (ii) To direct the respondents, especially, the Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer Sitamarhi, to deseal the City Hospital, Banouli Road, Sursand Sitamarhi which is duly registered under the Bihar Clinical Establishment Act, 2013. 3. For the reliefs sought above, the petitioner is given liberty to move with a representation before the Civil Surgeon- cum-Chief Medical Officer, Sitamarhi who will act in accordance with law on the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. 4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the direction for consideration of the representation of the petitioner does not mean a direction for desealing the premises in question. 5. With the aforesaid observation, this application is disposed of. Vikas/- (Sandeep Kumar, J) U