Disposed¶25

Mithilesh Jaiswal v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Mar 2024CWJC/4132/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court CWJC No.4132 of 2024, decided 18-03-2024; Mithilesh Jaiswal v. State of Bihar and others; release of seized Hero HF Deluxe Motorcycle UP-52-BP-0791; Bhore P.S. Case No. 521/2023, Gopalganj; section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act 2016; Rule 12 A Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules 2021 with amended sub Rule (2); writ of mandamus requires prior demand before competent authority plus statutory duty; writ petition disposed of as premature; liberty to apply under Rule 12 A; authority to decide within two weeks; P. B. Bajanthri and Alok Kumar Pandey, JJ.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as premature; petitioner left free to submit an application under Rule 12 A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021, and the concerned authority directed to decide such application within two weeks of receipt.

Mithilesh Jaiswal Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the Hero HF Deluxe Motorcycle (Registration No. UP-52-BP-0791, Chassis No. MBLHAW147MHF00719) seized in connection with Bhore P.S. Case No. 521/23. +1 more

¶22

Court's answer

The disposal of the writ petition as premature does not preclude the petitioner from approaching the concerned authority under Rule 12 A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 (read with amended sub Rule (2)); upon submission of an application in the prescribed format, the concerned authority is directed to decide the petitioner's case within two weeks of receipt.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

Issuance of a writ of mandamus requires a prior demand before the competent authority followed by statutory duty vested in the public authority; since no such demand was made, the writ petition stands disposed of as premature.

¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Mandamus - precondition of prior demand: A writ petition (CWJC No.4132 of 2024, Patna High Court, decided 18-03-2024) by Mithilesh Jaiswal seeking release of his Hero HF Deluxe Motorcycle (Regn. No. UP-52-BP-0791) seized in connection with Bhore P.S. Case No. 521/23 registered under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act 2016 was disposed of as premature, because no demand had been made before the competent authority, which the court stated is a necessary ingredient for issuance of mandamus along with statutory duty. The court clarified that the disposal would not hinder the petitioner from approaching the concerned authority under Rule 12 A of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 read with amended sub Rule (2) thereof, and directed that authority to decide the petitioner's case within two weeks of receipt of such application in the prescribed format. Oral judgment per P. B. Bajanthri, J; coram also included Alok Kumar Pandey, J.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4132 of 2024

¶2

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

¶3

Mithilesh Jaiswal, aged about 23 Years (Male), Son of Ramayan Jaiswal, Resident of Village- Bhingar Bazar, P.S- Khampar, District- Deoria (Uttar Pradesh).

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Excise Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The District Magistrate Cum-Collector, Gopalganj.

¶8

The Superintendent of Police, Gopalganj.

¶9

S.H.O Bhore Police Station, District Gopalganj.

¶10

The Excise Commissioner, Gopalganj.

¶11

The Investigating Officer of Bhore P.S. Case No. 521/2023 Bhore Police Station, District Gopalganj.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

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

¶14

Appearance :

¶15

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Additional Advocate General 07

¶16

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

¶17

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI

¶18

and

¶19

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) Date : 18-03-2024

¶20

In the instant writ petition, petitioner has prayed for the

¶21

following relief/reliefs:

¶22

“(i) A writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate write order/orders, direction/directions to com commanding the respondent to release, Hero HF Deluxe Motorcycle bearing Registration No. UP-52-BP-0791, Chassis No. MBLHAW147MHF00719, Engine No. HA11ESMHF00428 in favour of the petitioner which has been seized earlier in connection with Bhore P.S. Case No. 521/23 registered for the offence under section 30(a) Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act 2016, forth with.

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.4132 of 2024 dt.18-03-2024 2/2

¶24

(iii) To any other relief/reliefs for with petitioner is found in titled to.”

¶25

2. For issuance of writ of mandamus there must be demand before the competent authority followed by statutory duty vested in the public authority. Ingredient No. 1 relating to demand before the competent authority is not forthcoming in the present lis . Accordingly, present writ petition stands disposed of as premature.

¶26

3. Disposal of the present writ petition would not be a hurdle for the petitioner to approach the concerned authority under Rule 12 A of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Rules, 2021 read with amended sub Rule (2) of Rule 12 A in the year 2022 and 2023. If such application is submitted in the prescribed format, the concerned authority is hereby directed to proceed to decide the petitioner’s case within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such application under Rule 12 A.

¶27

(P. B. Bajanthri, J)

¶28

( Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶29

GAURAV S./-

¶30

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	20.03.2024
Transmission Date	NA

Mithilesh Jaiswal v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithilesh Jaiswal v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Vinay Kumar Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority through its Managing Director, Vs M/S Sree Masala Udyog Industrial Area, Purnea

Rampravesh Ray Vs The State of Bihar through the Home Secretary, Patna ,Govt. of Bihar, Patna

Rabindra Kumar Sinha Vs The Union of India

Baby Devi Vs The State of Bihar