Patna High CourtMJC/1701/2017disposed

Dharmendra Pal v. The State Of Bihar, Through The Chief Secretary, Sri Anjani Kumar, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna And ORS

2017-09-11Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1701 of 2017 ====================================================== Dharmendra Pal, Son of Baijnath Pal, resident of village-Devaria, Police Station - Akodhigola, District - Rohtas at Sasaram. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Sri Anjani Kumar.

2. Sri P.K. Thakur, the Director General of Police, Patna, Bihar.

3. Sri Manvjeet Singh Dhilo, the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram.

4. Sri S. Kumarsami, the Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorized Officer Rohtas at Sasaram.

5. Sri Binod Yadav the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dehri, Rohtas at Sasaram.

6. Sri Rajiv Ranjan, the Inspector of Police cum S.H.O. Darihat. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vipin Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-09-2017 Heard the parties.

In the present case, the petitioner submits that as his vehicle has been seized and for release of the same, he filed Criminal Writ vide Cr.W.J.C. No.212 of 2016 before this Court. The said petition was permitted to be withdrawn with the liberty to take appropriate steps. Accordingly, the petitioner moved before the S.D.J.M. Dehri-On-Sone, Rohtas, for release of the vehicle, which was allowed, but the vehicle has not been released.

It is an admitted fact that the petitioner moved before the Court below for release of the vehicle and vide order

Patna High Court MJC No.1701 of 2017 (3) dt.12-09-2017 2/2 dated 06.02.2017, the prayer of the petitioner has been allowed. Now, the petitioner has grievance that the order of the Court below has not been complied with.

Let the petitioner approached before the S.D.J.M. Dehri-On-Sone, Rohtas and brought the aforesaid fact to the notice of the Court. However, it is made clear that when confiscation proceeding has been initiated the power of Criminal Court would be seized as per the consistent view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court.

Accordingly, this contempt proceeding is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- U