Disposed¶29

Kamal Kumar Agrawal v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Apr 2025MJC/1103/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt proceeding closed; conditional demolition order; police force for peaceful demolition; Nagar Parishad/Nagar Parisad Raxaul; Execution Case No. 2A/2016; Sub Judge 06 Motihari; Order XXI Rule 97 CPC; State of Bihar contesting execution; respondent no. 15(b); Gyanti Devi; CR No. 1927 of 2008; SLP (civil) No. 27117 of 2009; CWJC No. 23935 of 2018; MJC No. 1103 of 2024; Patna High Court; Harish Kumar, J.; East Champaran; Raxaul; Kamal Kumar Agrawal; liberty to approach Executing Court; expeditious conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceeding closed; petitioner granted liberty to place the entire facts before the Executing Court (Sub Judge 06, Motihari), which is to consider them and bring Execution Case No. 2A/2016 to its logical conclusion expeditiously. ¶29

Kamal Kumar Agrawal Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for non-compliance with the conditional order (provision of police force for peaceful demolition) should be continued, in view of the pendency of Execution Case No. 2A/2016 before the Executing Court.

¶29

Court's answer

This Court does not find any reason or occasion to continue with the contempt proceeding, in view of the pendency of the Execution Case.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is at liberty to bring on record the entire facts before the Executing Court, who shall consider the same and bring the Execution Case to its logical conclusion expeditiously.

¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Harish Kumar, J.), by oral order dated 04-04-2025 in MJC No. 1103 of 2024 (arising out of CWJC No. 23935 of 2018), closed a contempt proceeding against State and Nagar Parisad, Raxaul officials and a private opposite party. The order under contempt was conditional: police force was to be provided for peaceful demolition of an old and dilapidated building (with Nagar Parishad permission) only if no proceeding or dispute existed over the land. Compliance stood impeded by the pendency of Execution Case No. 2A/2016 before learned Sub Judge 06, Motihari, in which the petitioner is respondent no. 15(b) and the State of Bihar contests the execution under Order XXI Rule 97. Finding no reason to continue the contempt, the Court closed it and left the petitioner free to place the entire facts before the Executing Court, directing expeditious conclusion. Counsel had urged that the execution case was not maintainable as Gyanti Devi, who filed it, had lost her claim in CR No. 1927 of 2008 (this Court) and SLP (civil) No. 27117 of 2009 (Apex Court); the Court referred these matters to the Executing Court rather than deciding them.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1103 of 2024

¶2

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23935 of 2018

¶4

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

¶5

Kamal Kumar Agrawal, S/o Late Pawan Kumar Agrawal, Resident of Mohalla Mina Bazar, Post Office Road, P.O. and P.S. Raxaul, District- East Champaran.

¶6

... ... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar through District Magistrate East Champaran namely Saurabh Jorwal son of not known.

¶9

Superintendent of Police, East Champaran, Motihari namely Sri Kantesh Kumar Mishra son of not known.

¶10

Dy. Superintendent of Police-Cum SDPO Raxaul District- East Champaran namely Dhirendra Kumar son of not known.

¶11

S.D.O. Raxaul, District- East Champaran namely Shivakashi Dixit son of not known.

¶12

Raxaul Nagar Parisad, Raxaul, District-East Champaran through its Secretary namely Anand Kishore son of not known.

¶13

Executive Officer Nagar parisad, Raxaul, District- East Champaran namely Anibhuti Srivastava son of not known.

¶14

Chairman Nagar Parisad, Raxaul, District-East Champaran namely Dhurpati Devi son of not known.

¶15

S.H.O., Town P.S., Raxaul, District- East Champaran namely Sunil Kumar son of not known.

¶16

Ramsati Devi W/o Sri baidh nath Prasad Resident of Mohalla- old Exechange Road, raxaul, P.O. P.S- Raxaul, District- East Champaran.

¶17

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶18

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

¶19

Appearance :

¶20

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Shahnawaz Ali, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Government Advocate 3 ======================================================

¶21

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶22

5 04-04-2025 Heard the parties.

¶23

In compliance with the order of this Court, a show

¶24

cause affidavit has been filed with a categorical averment that the order under contempt was a conditional order, that if there

¶25

Patna High Court MJC No.1103 of 2024(5) dt.04-04-2025 2/3

¶26

shall not be any proceeding or dispute with respect to the land over which old and dilapidated building is erected and/or there is no proceeding or any impediment in demolishing the same, the concerned opposite parties shall provide the necessary police force in order to ensure peaceful demolition, for which permission has been accorded by Nagar Parishad, Raxaul. Since on the face of it an Execution Case bearing no. 2A/ 2016, with respect to the matter in question is pending in the Court of learned Sub Judge 06, Motihari the answering opposite party is facing difficulty to give effect to the order of this Court. Moreover, in the said proceeding the petitioner is opposite party/respondent no. 15(b). The State of Bihar is contesting the execution under order XXI Rule 97.

¶27

A detailed reply to the show cause affidavit has been filed. Mr. Shahnawaz, learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the very Execution Case is not maintainable in view of the fact that Gyanti Devi, who has filed the Execution Case, has lost her claim over the property in question before this Court in CR No. 1927 of 2008 and further before the Apex Court in SLP (civil) No. 27117 of 2009. Notwithstanding the aforesaid facts, she has been making all kind of trouble and depriving the petitioner from the fruit of the order of this Court.

¶28

Patna High Court MJC No.1103 of 2024(5) dt.04-04-2025 3/3

¶29

Having considered the submissions advanced and taking note of the plea taken by the petitioner in the reply to the show cause affidavit, this Court does not find any reason or occasion to continue with the contempt proceeding, in view of the pendency of the Execution Case. However, the petitioner is at liberty to bring on record the entire facts before the Executing Court, who shall consider the same and bring the Execution Case to its logical conclusion expeditiously.

¶30

With this observation, the contempt proceeding

¶31

stands closed.

¶32

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶33

supratim/-

¶34

Kamal Kumar Agrawal v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamal Kumar Agrawal 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subhash Chandra @ Pintu Vs The State of Bihar

Saroj Mani Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Mundrika Kumari @ Mundrika Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Pappu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Samudri Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Sobha Devi Vs The State of Bihar