Disposed¶22

Bipin Bihari Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Jul 2025MJC/954/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition consigned; liberty to challenge compliance/reasoned order passed by authority; MJC No.954 of 2024 in CWJC No.4293 of 2023; Bipin Bihari Prasad v. State of Bihar; Registrar Co-operative Society Bihar; Magadh Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Gaya; Patna High Court; Purnendu Singh, J; order dated 04-07-2025; short oral order, no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to the petitioner to challenge the reasoned order passed by the authority concerned before the appropriate forum; the contempt petition stands consigned (closed). ¶22

Bipin Bihari Prasad Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.954 of 2024

¶2

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4293 of 2023

¶4

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

¶5

Bipin Bihari Prasad Son of Late Dwarika Prasad, Resident of VillageSidharthpuri Colony, Road No. 1, P.O.-Buniadganj, P.S.-Manpur, DistrictGaya.

¶6

... ... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar through Registrar Co-operative Society, Bihar, Patna Sri Madhurendra Kumar.

¶9

The Board of Director through its Chairman, Magadh Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Gaya Bihar Sri Vinay Kumar.

¶10

The Chairman, Magadh Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Gaya Bihar Sri Vinay Kumar.

¶11

The Managing Director, Magadh Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Gaya Bihar Sri Nikesh Kumar.

¶12

... .Respondents .. Opposite Party/s

¶13

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

¶14

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Satya Ranjan Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Puspanjali Sharma, AC to SC 20 For respondents no.2 to 4: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate ======================================================

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶16

7 04-07-2025 Heard Mr. Satya Ranjan Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Puspanjali Sharma, learned AC to SC 20 for the State and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for respondents no.2 to 4.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶18

opposite parties informs that in compliance of the order of this Court, a reasoned order has been passed by the authority concerned during the pendency of the contempt petition.

¶19