Single judge disposed of a contempt petition in Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case, allowing petitioners liberty to agitate the matter afresh in future due to pending Division Bench proceedings.
Contempt petition disposed of with liberty to petitioners to agitate the matter afresh in future.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1665 of 2013
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18621 of 2012
======================================================
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Lal Babu Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nirbhay Kr.Singh, GP-26
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL ORDER
4 26-02-2014 Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that as the fate of contempt petition depends on the matter pending disposal before the Division Bench of this Court, no useful purpose would be served in keeping it pending.
In the facts of the case, the contempt petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to agitate the matter afresh, if so warrants in future.
Shashi.
(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition should be disposed of given pending matters before the Division Bench.
Whether petitioners should have liberty to agitate the matter afresh in future.
Parshuram Kumar Singh
Amit
The State Of Bihar
Mr. Abhya Nand
Mr. S. Raveendran
Mr. Alok Raj
Samarendra Pratap Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
