Patna High CourtMJC/1232/2017dismissed

Indradeo Parera v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Namely Amir Subhani, Department Of Registration

2017-05-10Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1232 of 2017 In Cr. WJC 291 of 2017 ====================================================== Indradeo Parera, Son of Late Sukhdeo Parera, Resident of Village- Purnea City, P.S.- Sadar, District- Purnea.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary namely Amir Subhani, Department of Registration Excise and Prohibition, Government of Bihar.

2. Aditya Kr. Das, the Excise Commissioner, Bihar, Patna.

3. Pankaj Kr. Pal, the Collector -cum- District Magistrate, Purnea. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, AC to AAG - 6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-05-2017 This application has been filed for initiation of a contempt proceeding against the District Magistrate, Purnea for willful disobedience of the order dated 09.03.2017 passed by this Court in Cr.W.J.C. No.291 of 2017.

Annexure-B to the show cause filed by the District Magistrate, Purnea reveals that by order dated 28.04.2017 passed in Excise Case No.291 of 2016, the District Magistrate has already asked the petitioner to file surety bond for release of the vehicle and house in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 09.03.2017 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No.291 of 2017.

However, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, the amount of surety bond is excessive one.

Patna High Court MJC No.1232 of 2017 (3) dt.10-05-2017 The petitioner is at liberty to move the District Magistrate, Purnea for modification of the surety bond or may approach this Court for modification of the order dated 09.03.2017 to decide the surety by this Court itself.

With the aforesaid observation, this application stands dismissed as no case for initiation of a contempt proceeding is made out.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Arvind/- U