Dismissed

Md. Akhtar Ali Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Sept 2026Cont.(Cvl)/168/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt case, the High Court of Jharkhand held that since the opposite party no.3 passed a reasoned order on 02.09.2026, the contempt proceedings against them and other opposite parties were dropped, disposing of the matter. The petitioners were granted liberty to challenge the order of record. The plea of non-compliance by the petitioners was accepted to terminate the proceeding.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings against the opposite parties were dropped; case disposed. Petitioners granted liberty to challenge the order dated 02.09.2026.

Md. Akhtar Ali Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Contempt of Court | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. (2026:JHHC:27394)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.168 of 2026

¶3

¶4

Md. Akhtar Ali Ansari, son of Late Md. Alauddin Ansari, permanent resident of village Dhobani, P.O. Alkusha, P.S. Chas (M), District Bokaro and presently residing at village Sijua, P.O. Radha Nagar, P.S. Balidih, District Bokaro, Jharkhand.

¶5

Md. Gulam Mustufa Ansari, son of Md. Nabi Ansari, resident of village Dhobani, P.O. Alkusha, P.S. Chas (M), District Bokaro.

¶6

.......... Petitioners.

¶7

-Versus-

¶8

The State of Jharkhand

¶9

Shri Chandra Shekhar, Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶10

Sri Ajay Nath Jha, Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro.

¶11

Md. Mumtaj Ansari, Additional Collector, Bokaro.

¶12

Prabhash Dulla, Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Bokaro.

¶13

Sebaram Sahu, Circle Officer, Chas, District Bokaro.

¶14

Pranjal Tanda, Sub Divisional Officer, Chas, District Bokaro. .......... Opp. Parties.

¶15

¶16

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶17

----For the Petitioners : Md. Nasim Akhtar, Advocate For the State : Md. Shahabuddin, SC-II ----- Order No.05 Date: 11.09.2026

¶18

The present contempt case has been filed for initiating contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for their wilful and deliberate violation of the order dated 24^th October, 2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.5574 of 2024.

¶19

Md. Shahabuddin, learned SC-II refers to the order dated 2^nd September, 2026 passed by the opposite party no.3 (AnnexureA to the show cause affidavit dated 11^th September, 2026) and submits that the order dated 24^th October, 2024 passed by this Court has now been complied.

¶20

As against this, Md. Nasim Akhtar, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the opposite party no.3 instead of

¶21

Page 1 of 2

¶22

Neutral Citation No. (2026:JHHC:27394)

¶23

passing an order in Record No.02 of 1993-94 has initiated another case i.e. Misc. Case No.09 of 2025-26, rejecting the petitioners’ claim for issuance of “VANDOBASTI PARCHA” in terms with the settlement already made.

¶24

Be that as it may.

¶25

Since the opposite party no.3 has already passed a reasoned order dated 2^nd September, 2026, there is no need to further proceed in the matter. The contempt proceeding as against the opposite party no.3 including other opposite parties is hereby dropped.

¶26

The present contempt case stands disposed of.

¶27

The petitioners are, however, at liberty to take appropriate recourse against the order dated 2^nd September, 2026 passed by the opposite party no.3 as permissible under law.

¶28

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶29

11^th September, 2026 Sanjay/ Uploaded on 11.09.2026

¶30

Page 2 of 2

Md. Akhtar Ali Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Akhtar Ali Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases