Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sadanand YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The contempt proceeding was dropped and the miscellaneous jurisdiction petition dismissed due to the petitioner’s failure to appear.

Summary

The petitioner Sadanand Yadav filed a miscellaneous jurisdiction petition seeking to enforce a contempt order arising from Civil Writ Jurisdiction case No.12168 of 2021. The State of Bihar, represented by counsel, submitted that the order dated 12 January 2023 had been complied with and a supplementary show‑cause notice filed. The petitioner’s counsel failed to appear despite repeated calls. The bench, noting the absence of any representation for the petitioner, held that the contempt proceedings could not continue. Consequently, the court dropped the contempt proceeding and dismissed the miscellaneous jurisdiction petition. The decision underscores the requirement of representation for a party in contempt matters.

Issues considered

  • Whether the contempt order dated 12‑01‑2023 has been complied with
  • Whether the contempt proceeding can continue in the absence of the petitioner’s counsel
  • Whether the miscellaneous jurisdiction petition should be dismissed

Subjects

  • contempt proceeding
  • civil writ jurisdiction
  • non‑appearance of counsel
  • petition dismissed
  • high court

Judgment

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3269 of 2023
                                                        In
                                 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12168 of 2021
                  ======================================================
                  Sadanand Yadav Son of Late Siyaram Yadav, Resident of Village Kamarganj,
                  Johangira, Police Station Sultanganj, District Bhagalpur.

                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
            1.    The State of Bihar through Director General of Police, Government of Bihar,
                  Patna namely Mr. Rajvindar Singh Bhatti, Son of not known.
            2.    The Inspector General of Police, Purnea Range, Purnea namely Mr. Suresh
                  Prasad Choudhary, Son of not known.
            3.    The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Purnea Range, Purnea, namely Mr.
                  Suresh Prasad Choudhary, Son of not known.
            4.    The Superintendent of Police, District Araria, namely Ashok Kumar Singh,
                  Son of not known.
            5.    The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna, namely Mr. Pushkar Kumar

                                                         ... ... Opposite Party/s
                  ======================================================
                  Appearance :
                  For the Petitioner/s   :      None
                  For the State          :      Mr. Md. Nasrul Hoda Khan (SC-1)
                                                Mr. Md. Harun Quareshi (AC to SC-1)
                  For the AG             :      Mr. Vivekanand Kumar, Advocate
                  ======================================================
                  CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                        ORAL ORDER

10   17-01-2026                   None appears on behalf of the petitioner, even after

                    repeated calls. However, learned counsel for the State and

                    learned counsel for the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna are

                    present.

                                  2. Learned counsel for the State submits that the order

                    dated 12.01.2023 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 12168 of 2021 has

                    been complied with and a supplementary show cause has been

                    filed.
             Patna High Court MJC No.3269 of 2023(10) dt.17-01-2026
                                                         2/2




                                    3. Due to the absence of counsel for the petitioner

                       despite repeated calls, the contempt proceeding is hereby

                       dropped and accordingly, the present M.J.C petition stands

                       dismissed.



                                                                      (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.