Rajniti Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1450 of 2026 ====================================================== 1.
Rajniti Yadav Son of late Valdev Yadav, Resident of Village- Badi Kothiya, Post-Kothiya, Police Station Gangaur, Khagariya, District-Khagariya. 2.
Sanjay Kumar Singh, Son of Devki Nandan Singh, Resident of Village Ward no. 10 Sungathiya, Police Station - Gangaur, District- Khagariya. 3.
Deepak Kumar, Son of Tejnarayan Singh, Resident of Village- Tetrabadh, Police Station - Khagariya, District- Khagariya. 4.
Sachidanand Ray, Son of Ramotar Roy, Resident of Village- Vidharthi Tola, Post-Mansi, Police Station - Mansi, District - Khagariya. 5.
Kumar Niranjan, Son of Bhola Ray, Resident of Village- Vidharthi Tola, Post- Mansi, Police Station - Mansi, District - Khagariya. 6.
Ashok Singh @ Ashok Kumar Son of late Brahmdev Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Jahangira, Police Station - Gangor, District- Khagariya. 7.
Shri Nandlal Thakur, Son of Jitan Thakur, Resident of Village- Praman Thakur, Post-Koshi, Police Station Muffasil, District- Khagariya. 8.
Ramanand Prasad Singh, Son of Ydunandan Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-Ramnagar Math, Police Station Labhgaon, District-Khagairya. 9.
Ram Joyti Devi @ Radha Devi, wife of Sachchidananda Ray, Resident of Village Ward no.11. Vidyarthi Tola, Police Station Sansarpur, DistrictKhagariya. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar. 2.
The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bihar, Patna. 3.
The Managing Director, Khagaria Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Khagaria. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shashi Shekhar Sinha For the State :
Mr. Anil Kumar Verma, AAG 9 For the Bank :
Mr. Bindhyachal Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 02-02-2026
1. The present writ application has been filed for quashing the notices issued by the Branch Manager, Khagaria Central Co-operative Bank Limited. against the petitioners vide memo no.61 dated 06.09.2024, memo no.
2/5 43, dated 21.10.2025, memo no. 45 dated 21.10.2025, memo no. 59, dated 13.11.2025, memo no. 39 dated 17.10.2025, memo no. 44, dated 21.10.2025, memo no. 63 dated 06.09.2024, memo no. 42 dated 21.10.2025 where by the petitioners were directed to submit their opinion with regard to alleged suspicious transaction in their bank accounts.
2. The brief facts giving rise to the present writ application is that on the inspection report of the Chief Vigilance Officer, alleging certain irregularities in the distribution of agriculture loan in Account No. 000115008005753, the Joint Registrar (Audit), Co-operative Societies, constituted a three-member committee, vide memo no. 9464, dated 20.12.2023, to enquire into the matter and submit the report within a fortnight.
3. The Committee conducted the inquiry and submitted its report to the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, vide letter no. 180, dated 27.05.2024. The Committee, during enquiry, found certain transactions to be suspicious in the alleged account from 14.03.2013 to 19.08.2023, as there was no Voucher/records/ledger maintenance of the transactions by the bank officials during that period.
3/5
4. After receipt of the report of the Committee, the Branch Manager, Khagaria District Central Co-operative Bank, issued impugned notices to the petitioners, whereby the petitioners were directed to deposit their respective amount as soon as possible in the bank account, otherwise submit their opinion in this regard within a period of seven days.
5. The Managing Director of the Khagaria District Central Co-operative Bank issued letter no. 6641, dated 12.11.2025, directing the Branch Manager of the Bank to lodge First Information Report against the petitioners as well as the officials of the bank.
6. Aggrieved by the issuance of notices, the petitioners have filed the present writ application.
7. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners argued that the bank statements of the accounts of the petitioners clearly demonstrate that the amounts were deposited in the accounts of the petitioners by way of cash and were not transferred from the Account No. 000115008005753, which is alleged to be suspicious in nature. He further argued that notices have been issued in the year 2024-2025, after a lapse of nearly 10 years
4/5 inasmuch as the alleged transactions pertain to the year 2016. He further argued that in all these years the bank has been regularly audited and nothing suspicious came from audit. He further argued that one of the petitioners submitted a detailed explanation to the bank.
8. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents submits that thi8s writ application is premature inasmuch as the matter is still pending before the Registrar and no final order or decision has been taken by the Registrar, Co- operative Societies, on the basis of the said inquiry report.
9. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned and have gone through the materials available on record.
10. The instant writ petition is premature as no final order has been passed. The petitioners cannot be permitted to put the cart before the horse. The present petition is based on preponderance of probability as the same is arising out of notices issued by the respondents in which only opinion was sought from the petitioners. Rather than giving their opinion, the petitioners have approached this Court challenging the issuance of notices.
11. In the opinion of this Court, the impugned notices do not
5/5 suffer from any infirmity, warranting interference by this writ court.
12. Accordingly, this writ petition, being devoid of any merit, is dismissed.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √