R.K. Rajan v. Arun Kumar Gupta And ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Review No.218 of 2014 IN Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 6218 of 2013 ===========================================================
1. R.K. Rajan, Advocate Son of Sri Mooral Lal, Resident of Pushpa Prakash Bhawan (Now Hari Niketan), near Choudhary Petrol Pump, Kankarbagh Main Road, P.S.- Kankarbagh, District- Patna- 800020 .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. Arun Kumar Gupta Son of not known person, at present S.H.O. Kankarbagh P.S., Patna- 20
2. Ram Janam Mishra, Son of not known person, at present A.S.I. Kankarbagh P.S., Patna- 20
3. Ram Sewak Rout, A.S.I. Kankarbagh P.S., Patna- 20 All through Sr. S.P., Patna
4. Jayant Kant, Son of not known person, at present City S.P., Patna
5. The State of Bihar represented through Home Commissioner Bihar, Patna Mr. Amir Sahani .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. R. K. Rajan, (In Person) For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nirbhay K.Singh, GP-26 Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, AC to GP-26 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE I. A. ANSARI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE I. A. ANSARI) Date: 23-09-2015 The defects, as pointed out by Registry, are ignored. Heard Mr. R.K. Rajan, appearing in person, and Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, learned Assistant Counsel to Government Pleader No.26, appearing on behalf of the Opposite Parties. By order, dated 26.06.2014, passed in MJC No. 6218 of 2018, this Court declined to initiate any proceedings for criminal contempt suo motu against the Opposite Parties making it clear that if
Patna High Court C. REV. No.218 of 2014 dt.23-09-2015 2/2 his rights are violated, in any manner, he has adequate remedy under the law.
Having perused the order, dated 26.06.2014, we do not find any error apparent on the face of the record, which calls for review of the order, more particularly, when it is for the Court to decide if suo motu initiate contempt proceeding or not. In view of the above, the review petition stands dismissed.
No order as to costs.
Though Mr. R.K. Rajan, who appears in person, has sought for a certificate in terms of Article 132 read with Article 134, we do not find that in the present case such a certificate needs to be granted.
The prayer for issuance of the certificate is, therefore, rejected.
(I. A. Ansari, ACJ) (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Mkr./- U