Disposed¶33

Mithilesh Kumar @ Amitabh Kumar v. the State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home Police Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

Patna HC23 Jul 2025CR. WJC/457/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Bihar Control of Crime Act 1981 S.3; preventive order; direction to mark attendance at Pandarak Police Station; Miscellaneous Appeal No. 212 of 2022; Collector/Divisional Commissioner Patna; infructuous writ petition; stigmatic observations; criminal antecedents; reputation protection declaration; Nagar Parishad Election 2022; CR. WJC 457/2023; Patna High Court; decided 23-07-2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ application disposed of as infructuous, with a declaration that the observations regarding the petitioner's criminal antecedents in the impugned orders were confined to justifying those orders alone and any such question in future shall be considered independently. ¶33

Mithilesh Kumar @ Amitabh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home Police Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ application survives for adjudication, given that the impugned orders have already taken effect and the three-month attendance period expired on 18.10.2022. +3 more

¶26

Court's answer

Finding that the impugned orders have already taken effect, the Court held the writ application to be infructuous at this stage and disposed of it accordingly.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

While disposing of the application, the Court declared that the observations in the impugned orders with regard to the criminal antecedents of the petitioner were confined to justifying the impugned orders alone, and that any such question arising in future shall be considered independently.

¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Coram: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Shailendra Singh, JJ.; order authored by Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.), decided 23-07-2025 in CR. WJC No.457 of 2023. The petitioner, Mithilesh Kumar @ Amitabh Kumar, challenged the order dated 13.10.2022 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Patna in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 212 of 2022, affirming the Collector, Patna's order dated 15.07.2022 in Case No.-XXXVIII-50/2022 under Section 3 of the Bihar Control of Crime Act, 1981, by which he was directed to mark attendance at Pandarak Police Station for three months - a period that expired on 18.10.2022. The petitioner objected to stigmatic statements regarding his criminal antecedents, to the attendance direction outside his own police station jurisdiction, and to the averment that he sought to contest the 2022 Nagar Parishad election despite not being a voter thereof. Holding that the impugned orders had already taken effect and the application had become infructuous, the Court disposed of the writ application, declaring that the observations regarding the petitioner's criminal antecedents were confined to justifying the impugned orders alone and any such question in future shall be considered independently.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.457 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Mithilesh Kumar @ Amitabh Kumar, Son of Sri Birendra Kumar, Resident of Village- Mahangupur, P.S.- Jhanipur (Phulwarishariff), District- Patna

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home Police Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

Principal Secretary, Home, Police Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

Divisional Commissioner, Patna.

¶10

District Magistrate, Patna.

¶11

Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.

¶12

S.H.O., Jhanipur, Police Station, District- Patna.

¶13

... ... Respondents

¶14

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

¶15

Appearance :

¶16

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Parasmani, Advocate Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Iqbal Asif Niazi, AC to GP-5

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and

¶19

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶20

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)

¶21

4 23-07-2025 We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶22

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by and dissatisfied with

¶23

the order dated 13.10.2022 passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 212 of 2022 by the Divisional Commissioner, Patna whereby and whereunder he has affirmed the order of the Collector, Patna passed on 15.07.2022 in Case No.-XXXVIII-50/2022 under Section 3 of the Bihar Control of Crime Act, 1981.

¶24

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that so far as the effect of the impugned orders is concerned, the

¶25

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.457 of 2023(4) dt.23-07-2025 2/3

¶26

effects have already taken place and the period of three months for which the petitioner was asked to mark his attendance in Pandarak Police Station has expired as back as on 18.10.2022.

¶27

4. The grievance of the petitioner at this stage is that in the impugned order, the District Magistrate has made stigmatic statements which are likely to harm the reputation of the petitioner. It is pointed out that while passing the order dated 15.07.2022, the District Magistrate, Patna directed the petitioner to mark his attendance in Pandarak Police Station even though the petitioner is a resident within the jurisdiction of Jhanipur Police Station, Danapur, Patna. This was purposely done in order to harass the petitioner.

¶28

5. It is further submitted that the averments made in the impugned order that the petitioner was looking to contest the ensuing Nagar Parishad Election of 2022 and for that reason, he was indulged in threatening the people remain unfounded as the petitioner had duly disclosed in his show cause that he was not an Electorate/voter from the Nagar Parishad, therefore, there was no question of his contesting election of the Nagar Parishad in the year 2022.

¶29

6. Mr. Iqbal Asif Niazi, learned AC to GP-5 submits that he is not sure as to why the petitioner was asked to mark his

¶30

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.457 of 2023(4) dt.23-07-2025 3/3

¶31

attendance in Pandarak Police Station but it would be his submission that at this stage, this writ application has become infructuous and so far as the observation with regard to criminal antecedents of the petitioner is concerned, that is only for purpose of justifying the impugned orders and in no way, it may be taken as casting aspersion on the reputation of the petitioner.

¶32

7. Having regard to the submissions noted hereinabove and on finding that the impugned orders have already taken effect, therefore, at this stage, this application has become infructuous, we dispose of the present writ application declaring that the writ application has become infructuous, however, the observations made in the impugned orders with regard to the criminal antecedents of the petitioner are confined to justify the impugned orders alone and in future, if any such question would arise for consideration, the same shall be considered independently.

¶33

8. This writ application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶34

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶35

(Shailendra Singh, J)

¶36

lekhi/- U

Mithilesh Kumar @ Amitabh Kumar v. the State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home Police Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithilesh Kumar @ Amitabh Kumar v. the State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home Police Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

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

Ajay Kumar Sah @ Ajay Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Suraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar, through the Director General of Police, Old Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.

Rajan pandit Vs The State of Bihar through Pricipal Secretary, Home Dept, Govt of Bihar,Patna

M/s. Raja Babu Kapra Ghar Vs The Union of India

Bhotar Yadav @ Bhatar Vs The State of Bihar through the chief secretary govt of Bihar, Patna

Sukho Yadav @ Sukhu Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar