Patna High Court
Anil SinghversusThe State of Bihar through The Chief Secretary, Home Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
- Decided
- Disposal
- CONVERTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
Judicial orders are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226; they may be challenged under Article 227 or Section 528 of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Anil Singh, sought the release of a seized Bolero pick‑up vehicle that had been confiscated in a criminal case under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 11(i)(d)(e)(f) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. The trial court and the Sessions Court both rejected his request, prompting him to file writ petitions challenging those orders. The High Court observed that, as per Supreme Court precedents (Neeta Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra), judicial orders cannot be attacked under Article 226 writ jurisdiction, though they may be reviewed under Article 227 or Section 528 of the BNSS. Consequently, the Court allowed the petitioner’s request to convert the writ petition into a criminal miscellaneous petition for appropriate relief. The Court directed the petitioner’s counsel to effect the conversion within two weeks and instructed the office to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether judicial orders of lower courts are amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
- Whether the petitioner can obtain release of the seized vehicle through a writ petition.
- Whether the petition can be converted into a criminal miscellaneous petition.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 414
- Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act — s. 11(d), 11(e), 11(f), 11(i)
Subjects
- Article 226
- Article 227
- writ jurisdiction
- criminal revision
- vehicle seizure
- animal cruelty
- conversion of petition
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.569 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2024 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Anil Singh, Son of Ramji Singh @ Ram Ji Singh, R/o village - Narbatpur,
Chausa, P.S.- Buxar Mufassil, District - Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through The Chief Secretary, Home Department, Govt. of
Bihar, Patna. Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Transport Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna Bihar
3. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, District - Kaimur. Bihar
4. The Superintendent of Police, District - Kaimur. Bihar
5. The S.H.O., Ramgarh (Nuaon) P.S., District - Kaimur. Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar Pradhan, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.G.P.7
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-01-2026 Apparently, the petitioner has approached this Court
against the two judicial orders dated 30.05.2024 passed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Mohania in Ramgarh
(Nuaon) P.S. Case No. 98 of 2024 as well as order dated
21.09.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kaimur at
Bhabua in Criminal Revision No. 94 of 2024, although prayer
has been made seeking direction to the respondent authorities
for release of the Bolero Pick-up vehicle bearing registration no.
BR-44GA-5228 in favour of the petitioner, which has been
seized in connection with Ramgarh (Nuaon) P.S. Case No.98 of
2024, registered under Sections 414/34 of Indian Penal Code
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.569 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
read with Sections 11(i)(d)(e)(f) of Prevention of Cruelty of
Animal Act. However, the petitioner has approached the learned
trial court seeking release of the aforesaid vehicle and the prayer
for release of the vehicle was rejected vide order dated
30.05.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class,
Mohania. Subsequently, the petitioner preferred Criminal
Revision No.94/2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Kaimur
at Bhabua and the learned revisional court upheld the order of
the learned trial court and rejected the criminal revision petition
of the petitioner. Therefore, effectively, the petitioner has been
challenging two judicial orders in the garb of seeking release of
his vehicle.
2. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Neeta
Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. in Special
Leave Petition (Crl. A. No. 13578 of 2024) and Pradnya
Pranjal Kulkarni Vs. State Of Maharashtra & Anr in Special
Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.13424/2025, has held that judicial
orders are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, though the same may be challenged
under Article 227 of the Constitution or Section 528 of BNSS.
3. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner
seeks permission to convert the present petition into a criminal
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.569 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
miscellaneous petition under appropriate heading.
4. Permission is accorded.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to
convert the present petition into a criminal miscellaneous
petition under appropriate heading within two weeks.
6. Office is directed to extend all cooperation towards
conversion.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.