Satyendra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar Throgh The Principal Secretary, Department Of Excise And Prohibition, Governmen

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3478 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12912 of 2018 ====================================================== Satyendra Prasad S/o Baleshwar Mahto R/o Village-Bermi, Police Station, Kawakole, District- Nawadah ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Excise And Prohibition, Governmen 2.

The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Nawada 3.

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Nawada 4.

The Superintendent of Police, Excise and Prohibition, Nawada 5.

The Officer-in-Charge, Kankarbagh Police Station, Nawada ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. AC to AAG 6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD) 28-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Let the defects be ignored.

The petitioner in the present case is seeking certain corrections which have occurred in the order dated 31.07.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 12912 of 2018.

It appears from the averments made in the writ application that the petitioner had made certain incorrect statements in the said writ application giving wrong description

Patna High Court MJC No.3478 of 2018(3) dt.28-08-2019 2/3 of the vehicle in question and the description of the respondent no. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the supplementary affidavit was filed on behalf of the petitioner in the said writ application pointing out the discrepancies with regard to the vehicle registration number and respondent no. 3 but that could not be placed before the Hon'ble Court while passing the order dated 31.07.2018.

Having gone through the statements made in the present application, we find that a bonafide error has taken place in the order dated 31.07.2018 because the supplementary affidavit filed in the writ application could not be placed before the Hon'ble Bench at the relevant time. We, therefore, direct that in the order dated 31.07.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 12912 of 2018 the description of vehicle be read as 'Motorcycle bearing Registration No. BR-27C-8439' and the description of respondent no. 3 be recorded as the 'Superintendent of Police, Nawada' in place of 'Senior Superintendent of Police Nawada'. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact the description of respondent no. 5 has also been wrongly recorded as 'Officer-in-Charge, Kankarbagh Police Station, Nawadah' whereas it should be 'officer-in-

Patna High Court MJC No.3478 of 2018(3) dt.28-08-2019 3/3 Charge, Kawakole, Police Station, Nawada'.

We direct the aforesaid corrections be carried out and the order dated 31.07.2018 be read accordingly. By virtue of this order now the vehicle in question shall be released on petitioner complying with the conditions prescribed therein within three weeks from today. The application stands disposed of.

(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ) ( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/- U