← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/4997/2018disposed

Hem Chandra Jha v. Shri Deepak Kumar,

2019-04-29Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.4997 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1569 of 2018 ====================================================== Hem Chandra Jha Son of late Bishwanath Jha, Resident of Village and PostKatiya, P.S. Katiya, P.S. Benepatti, District-Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

Shri Deepak Kumar, Chief Secretary, State Of Bihar. 2.

Dr. Kamal Kishore Singh, Son of not known the Inspector General, Prison, Department of Home(Jail), Patna.

3.

Shri G. Jayavardhan , Son of not known the Assistant Inspector General, Prision, Department of Home(Jail), Patna.

4.

Shri Abhishek Singh, Son of not known, the District Magistrate, Gaya. 5.

Shri Deepak Barnwal, Son of not known the Superintendent of Police, Madhubani.

6.

Shri Rajeev Kumar Jha, Son of not known, The Superintendent Central Jail, Gaya.

7.

Shri Sanjeev Rahul, Son of not known, the probation Officer, Benepatti, Madhubani.

8.

Shri Mahendra Prasad Singh, Son of not known, the Officer -in-Charge Benepatti, Police Station, District- Madhubani. ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. AC to AAG-3 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 29-04-2019 In view of the order as contained in Annexure 'G' series enclosed with the show cause filed on behalf of opposite party nos. 2, 3 and 6, this Court is of the view that the contempt application cannot proceed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken efforts to demonstrate from Annexure 'G' series that it is a totally unreasoned order and there is no application of judicious mind

Patna High Court MJC No.4997 of 2018(4) dt.29-04-2019 2/2 as earlier the respondents were in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner would be at liberty to raise all such pleas which will be available to him while challenging the order as contained in Annexure 'G' series.

This contempt application is disposed off accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/- U