Patna High Court
MANISH KUMAR @ SANTOSH KUMARversusThe State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Department of Home Affairs Bihar, Patna.
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The petition is not maintainable; judicial orders of civil courts are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and there is no roster for criminal miscellaneous petitions under Article 227.
Summary
Manish Kumar petitioned the Patna High Court under Articles 226 and 227 for a writ to quash the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate that refused him compulsory bail under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Neeta Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, which held that civil court orders are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226. The High Court observed that it has no roster for criminal miscellaneous petitions under Article 227. Consequently, the petition was held to be non‑maintainable and was disposed of. The Court directed the return of the certified copy of the petition after replacing it with a true photocopy.
Issues considered
- Whether the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate refusing bail can be challenged under Article 226 of the Constitution.
- Whether a criminal miscellaneous petition is maintainable under Article 227 of the Constitution.
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain the petition seeking quashing of the bail order.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 167(2)
Subjects
- bail
- Section 167 Cr.P.C.
- writ jurisdiction
- Article 226
- Article 227
- criminal miscellaneous petition
- High Court
- petition dismissed
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3083 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2024 Thana- SAHARSA SADAR District- Saharsa
======================================================
Manish Kumar @ Santosh Kumar, Son of Sipach Yadav Resident of Village
Barsam Ward No. 3, P.S.- Basnahi, District - Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Department of Home
Affairs Bihar, Patna. Bihar
2. Director General of Police Bihar, Patna. Bihar
3. District Magistrate Saharsa. Bihar
4. Superintendent of Police Saharsa. Bihar
5. Officer-in-charge Saharsa Sadar Police Station. Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Diwakar Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, AC to SC-23
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 The petitioner has approached this Court for
quashing the order dated 05.08.2025 passed by the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in Saharsa P.S. Case No.
182/2024 whereby and whereunder the learned trial court
refused to release the petitioner on compulsive bail under
Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C., apart from other reliefs.
02. Apparently, the petitioner has approached this
Court against a judicial order passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa.
03. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Neeta
Singh & Ors. Vs. The State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. in
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.3083 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/2
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 13578/2024 has held that
the judicial orders of the civil court are not amenable to writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Though the
present petition has been filed under Article 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, but this Court has got no roster of criminal
miscellaneous petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India.
4. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of as
not entertainable.
5. At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner,
office is directed to return the certified copy annexed with the
petition after substituting the same with its true/photocopy.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-
U T
Checking your session…