Allowed

Sunil Sah Jaiswal @ Sunil Sah @ Sunil Kumar Jaiswal v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC3 Apr 2019CWJC/17615/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the issuance of an arrest warrant without deciding an objection in a certificate case, the Patna High Court quashed the warrant. The court directed the District Certificate Officer to decide pending objections and provided a 60-day stay on executing any such warrants.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 19.04.2018 is quashed. No objection to the warrant against the petitioner; warrants in other cases shall not be executed for 60 days.

Sunil Sah Jaiswal @ Sunil Sah @ Sunil Kumar… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17615 of 2018

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Sunil Sah Jaiswal @ Sunil Sah @ Sunil Kumar Jaiswal S/o Late Sarju Prasad Jaiswal @ Sarju Sah Resident of Village - Noan, P.S. Noan, District - Kaimur.

¶4

... ... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Bihar Mines and Geology Department, Patna at Patna.

¶7

The Special Secretary-cum-Director, Bihar Mines and Geology Department, Patna.

¶8

Auction Officer, Mines Patna Circle at Patna.

¶9

Auction Officer, Mohaniya District Kaimur at Bhabua.

¶10

... ... Respondents

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arun Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Mines : Mr. Naresh Dixit, Advocate Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha- GA-7 Mr. Abhishek Singh, AC to GA-7 ======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 03-04-2019

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in Certificate Case No. 04/2015-16 the petitioner has filed his objection which would be evident from the order dated 31.05.2016. Thereafter, instead of deciding the objection of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order thereon, the District Certificate Officer has issued warrant of arrest against him for recovery of the amount.

¶15

Learned counsel submits that issuance of warrant of arrest without deciding the objection of the petitioner is against the procedures established by law and hence is liable to be set aside. It is further submitted that there are five different

¶16

Patna High Court CWJC No.17615 of 2018(2) dt.03-04-2019 2/3

¶17

certificate proceedings initiated against the petitioner for five different years, however because of the issuance of warrant of arrest issued against him in one of the cases, he is unable to take a proper objection in those cases and pursue his remedy in accordance with law.

¶18

Learned counsel for the Department of Mines, Government of Bihar submits that in fact for recovery of the certificate amount the petitioner was once arrested but then he was released on making payment of some amount approximately Rs. 70,500/-. He had agreed to pay the remaining dues in few installments but then failed to do so. It is submitted that the conduct of the petitioner does not show his bonafide .

¶19

Learned counsel for the State is also present and adopts the submission of learned counsel representing the Department of Mines.

¶20

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, this court finds that so far as Certificate Case No. 04/2015-16 is concerned, in the order dated 31.05.2016, it appears that the petitioner had submitted his objection. If it is so, it was not correct on the part of the District Certificate Officer to issue a warrant of arrest against the petitioner without deciding his objection. Thus, the order dated

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.17615 of 2018(2) dt.03-04-2019 3/3

¶22

19.04.2018, by which warrant of arrest has been ordered to be issued against the petitioner, is quashed. The warrant issued in the said case shall not be executed against the petitioner.

¶23

So far as other cases are concerned, this court directs that the petitioner would appear in those cases within a period of four weeks from today and shall file his objection in those cases which will be considered. The District Certificate Officer shall consider the objection of the petitioner and will pass an appropriate order thereon. For a period of 60 days from today the warrant of arrest, if any, in any of those cases, shall not be executed.

¶24

The writ application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶25

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶26

Rajeev/-

¶27

Sunil Sah Jaiswal @ Sunil Sah @ Sunil Kumar Jaiswal v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Sah Jaiswal @ Sunil Sah @ Sunil Kumar Jaiswal v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

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

Ravi Ranjan Kumar Raja Vs The State of Bihar and Ors.

Deenbandhu Jha Vs The Chief Manager and Ors.

Nkg Infrastructure Ltd. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Suresh Sah Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shila Devi Alias Sheela Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Mamun Rashid @ Md. Mamun Rasid Vs The State Election Commission Panchayat and Ors.