Dilip Kumar Mahto @ Dilip Kumar Nirala v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21158 of 2018 ====================================================== Dilip Kumar Mahto @ Dilip Kumar Nirala Son of Late Asharfi Mahto Resident of Village- Parmanandpur,Police Station-Dumra,Distt.-Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Inspector General Prison, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.

The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi 4.

The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur 5.

The District Magistrate,Patna 6.

The Jail Superintendent,Special Central Jail,Bhagalpur 7.

The Jailor,Special Central Jail,Bhagalpur 8.

The Jail Superintendent,Adarsh Central Jail,Beur,Patna 9.

The Jailor,Adrsh Central Jail,Beur,Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Md. Nadim Seraj - Gp5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 25-09-2024 Though the present writ petition has been filed to pay compensation to the petitioner for keeping him in jail custody beyond the sentence awarded to him, vide judgment and order of sentence dated 11.7.2002, passed by the Ld. Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, in Sessions Trial No. 278/01/84/01, as also for making payment of arrear of wages for the period, the petitioner was suffering his sentence in jail i.e. in between 7.12.2000 to 17.9.2017, however, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Respondent-State, by referring to

Patna High Court CWJC No.21158 of 2018(3) dt.25-09-2024 2/2 paragraph no. 11 of the counter affidavit, filed in the present case that the total remuneration of the petitioner for 2787 days for which he had worked, totals upto a sum of Rs. 53,252/-, out of which, a sum of Rs. 12,610/- was deducted under the head of victim compensation and the balance amount of Rs. 40,682/- has already been paid to the petitioner, hence, in case the petitioner is having any subsisting grievance, he can take recourse to the appropriate remedies as are otherwise available under the law.

2.

The aforesaid aspect of the matter has not been controverted by the petitioner, inasmuch as no rejoinder affidavit has been filed, hence, I deem it fit and proper to dispose off the present writ petition, however, with liberty to the petitioner to avail such other remedies as are otherwise available under the law for redressal of his subsisting grievance, if any. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U