NOMINAL INDEX [Citations 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 1 to 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 156]Manoj Kumar Sah Versus The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 1Kalyan Sah v. Mosmat Rashmi Priya 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 2Kaushlya Devi v. The State of Bihar & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 3Anmol Kumar v. The State of Bihar & 6 Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 4Anamika Pranav v. Anil Kumar Choudhary 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 5Kamla Kant...
NOMINAL INDEX [Citations 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 1 to 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 156]
Manoj Kumar Sah Versus The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 1
Kalyan Sah v. Mosmat Rashmi Priya 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 2
Kaushlya Devi v. The State of Bihar & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 3
Anmol Kumar v. The State of Bihar & 6 Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 4
Anamika Pranav v. Anil Kumar Choudhary 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 5
Kamla Kant Prasad v. The State of Bihar & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 6
Nida Amina Ahmad v. The Union of India and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 7
Md. Sarfaraj vs. State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 8
Paramjeet Kumar (Minor) Vs. The Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 9
DR. Amod Prabodhi Vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 10
Virendra Kumar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 11
Shiv Kumar and Ors. vs Anil Bhagat and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 12
Awadh Tiwari vs. The State Of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 13
Hari Shankar Yadav Vs. Dakhiya Devi 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 14
Surendra Bahadur Singh vs. Yogendra Bahadur Singh 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 15
Aditya Kumar vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 16
Deepak Kumar Vs State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 17
Neelam Sinha vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 18
Jitendra vs. The State Bank Of India and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 19
Gammon Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 20
Shyam Kumar Jha and Ors vs. The State Of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 21
M/s Aman Industries vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 22
Raj Kumar Yadav vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 23
Munakiya Devi vs. The State Of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 24
JK vs. RS and Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 25
Lavkush Anupam vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 26
Ashok Kumar Sinha vs. State Bank of India and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 27
Rama Prasad Singh vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 28
Amit Kumar and Ors vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 29
Ajay Kumar Madhesiy vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 30
X vs The State of Bihar Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 31
AM @ AK vs. PD 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 32
Laxman Sah. and Ors vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 33
Md. Wasim Uddin vs. State of Bihar and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 34
M/S Kaveri Liquors (P) Ltd vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 35
Kanchan Kumar Mishra vs The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 36
Ganga Ram Paswan vs. Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 37
Munilal Yadav & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 38
Sangeeta Rani vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 39
Youth For Equality & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. along with connected pleas 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 40
M/s REW Contracts Pvt Ltd vs Bihar State Power Transmission Co Ltd & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 41
Ajay Kumar vs. State of Bihar & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 42
BS vs. SK and Anr 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 43
The State of Bihar and Ors. Vs. Sidharth Pratap 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 44
Pankaj Kumar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 45
Vikash Kumar Vs. The Hon'ble Patna High Court 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 46
Prem Kumar vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 47
Ranjan Kumar Gupta vs. Puja Devi 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 48
Rajani Kant Ojha vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 49
Koshi Vikas Sangharsh Morcha and Ors vs. Union of India and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 50
Md. Ishakh vs. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 51
Kumar Gaurav vs. State of Bihar & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 52
Om Prakash Tiwari vs. BCCI & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 53
Congress Maidan Bachao Samiti vs. State of Bihar & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 54
Dhananjay Seth vs. The Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 55
Sunil Kumar vs. State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 56
M/s DEN Networks Limited Versus The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 57
Anshuman Shreya (Advocate) In person vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 58
Shambhu Nath Sikari vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 59
Kumar Amit vs. The Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 60
Ram Bahadur Pandey and Ors vs. Union of India and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 61
Rajesh Kumar Singh vs The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 62
Nikhil Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 63
Umesh Kumar Singh vs The State of Bihar and Ors With Prakash Kumar Bhatt vs The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 64
Hero Cycle Limited And Anr Vs. Hero Ecotech Limited And Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 65
Vijay Shankar Rai vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 66
Maharana Singh vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 67
Mahendra Singh vs The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 68
Rajnish Singh @ Rajnish Kumar @ Chuhwa vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 69
Rovins Kumar vs. The Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 70
Swati Swarnim vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 71
Swati Swarnim vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 71
Jai Kishor vs The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 72
The Registrar General, Patna High Court vs. Ram Vyas and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 73
Pranav Kumar Ghosh Vs. The Union Of India And Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 74
Virendra Thakur vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 75
Meena Kumari Sinha vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 76
Sudama Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 77
Palak Bharti vs. The State Of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 78
Shobha Singh vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 79
M/S Sangam Wires vs. The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 80
Sakindar Yada Vs.The State Of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 81
Manoj Kumar and Another vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 82
Navalkishor Singh Son vs The State of Bihar And Others Civil 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 83
Neeta Tripathi @ Dr. Nita Tripathi Vs. State Of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 84
SK vs. RD 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 85
Income Tax Officer vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 86
Radhe Sharma v. Chief Secretary, Mines and Geology & others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 87
Youth For Equality and others vs. State of Bihar and others along with connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 88
Progressive Constructions Limited vs. The State of Bihar and Another
2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 89
PCM Cement Concrete Pvt. Ltd vs. The Union of India and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 90
Shailja Vajpe vs. The Patna Municipal Corporation and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 91
Rajanish Kumar Mishra and Others vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 92
Rakesh Kumar @ Chandan Mandal And One Another Vs. The State Of Bihar Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 93
Reshma Prasad vs. State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 94
Veterans Forum for Transparency in Public vs The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 95
M/s Aastha Enterprises vs The State of Bihar and Another 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 96
Nisha Gupta vs. Uday Chand Gupta 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 97
Akrity Aishwarya vs The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 98
Shankar Kumar vs. The State of Bihar and Anr 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 99
Satyam Abhishek vs State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 100
Noor Alam Khan vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 101
Arun Kumar Singh Alias Arun Singh vs. Nirmala Devi 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 102
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Satish Kumar Keshri 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 103
Prushotam Yadav @ Chotu Vs. The State Of Bihar And Anr 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 114
Kumod Mandal Vs. The State Of Bihar LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Pat) 115
Rambilash Mahto and Others vs. The State of Bihar 2023 Livelaw (Pat) 116
Manoj Kumar Gupta vs. The Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 117
Rohitash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 118
Smt. Abha Kumari vs. The State Of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 119
Deepak Mandal vs The State Of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 120
Shri Giridhar Gopal Vs Smt. Ramavati Devi 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 121
Khusboo Kumari vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 122
Chandradev Yadav Vs The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 123
M/s Cohesive Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd vs The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and Ors 2023 Livelaw (Pat) 128
M/s S K Construction and Company vs vs The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 Livelaw (Pat) 129
Mostt. Jaymanti Dev vs The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 130
Siwan Zila Mukhiya Sangh through its Chairman Ajay Bhasker Chauhan vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 131
Dasrath Ram Vs. The State Of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 132
Rakesh Kumar Alias Rakesh Kumar Singh Alias Raku vs. The State of Bihar and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 133
M/s. Vishwanath Iron Store vs. The Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 134
M/s Punit Kumar Choubey vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, and Others 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 135
Satyamanu Kumar Singh vs. The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 136
Sanjeev Kumar vs. The State Of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 137
Ravi Kant vs. Bandana Kumari 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 138
Sanjay Kumar Male vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 139
Musmat Shanti Devi & Anr vs. Lallu and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 140
Lalan Kumar Yadav & Ors vs The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 141
Jalaluddin Khan @ Md. Jalaluddin vs The Union of India 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 142
Mahavir Sharmik and Nirman Swalambi Sahkari Samiti Limited vs State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 143
Md. Tazuddin vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 144
Avinash Kumar Ranjan vs The State of Bihar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 145
Navjot Singh Sidhu vs The State of Bihar and Anr 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 146
The State of Bihar vs. Amar Kumar 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 147
M/s Trimurti Private Limited vs The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 148
M/s Friends Mobile vs The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 149
M/s Ceat Ltd. vs The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 150
M/s ACC Limited vs. The State of Bihar & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 151
M/s Micro Zone vs The Union of India and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 152
Smt. Rudra Maya Sinh vs. The Registrar General and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 153
Alok Bharti vs. Jyoti Raj 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 154
M/s Prince Sanitation Gandhi Path vs. The State of Bihar and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 155
Orders/Judgments
Case Tile: Manoj Kumar Sah Versus The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 1
The Patna High Court has held that the GST registration was canceled without granting him the opportunity of a personal hearing. The division bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Partha Sarthy has quashed the GST cancellation order and held that the authority ought to have at least referred to the contents of the show cause and the response thereto, which was not done.
Not only is the order non-speaking, but it is also cryptic in nature, and the reason for cancellation is not decipherable.
Daughter-In-Law Can't Claim Maintenance From Father-In-Law U/S 125 CrPC: Patna High Court
Case Title: Kalyan Sah v. Mosmat Rashmi Priya
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 2
The Patna High Court has clarified that a daughter-in-law is not entitled to claim maintenance from her father-in-law under Section 125 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure. The Single Judge Bench of Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra further held that a Family Court cannot invoke Section 125 CrPC to grant interim maintenance while deciding an application for maintenance under Section 19 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act (the HAMA).
The Court said: “Section 125 of Cr.P.C. deals with an order for maintenance of wife, children and parents. The daughter-in-law cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. but she can claim the same under Section 19 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. The provision of Section 125 Cr.P.C. in petition under Section 19 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 cannot be applied.”
Case Title: Kaushlya Devi v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 3
The Patna High Court has reiterated that departmental proceedings against a delinquent employee abates with his death and therefore, no one can be substituted in his place to represent him to put forward a defence.
While allowing the writ petition claiming family pension, the Single Judge Bench of Justice Harish Kumar observed, “It is settled proposition of law that judicial enquiry or departmental proceeding against a delinquent totally abates on death of an employee for the simple reason that in order to punish an employee, there must be subsistence of employer and employee relationship. Once an employee died the said relationship ceases. The defence, if any, is a personal defence available to the employee and no person can be substituted in place of dead employee.”
Patna High Court Shuts 49 Brick Kilns Over Failure To Shift To 'Cleaner Technology'
Case Title: Anmol Kumar v. The State of Bihar & 6 Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 4
The Patna High Court on Saturday directed the government to close 49 brick kilns that failed to shift to cleaner technology and produce fly ash bricks, despite a cut-off date set by the Bihar State Pollution Control Board.
The Board had issued a Notification in December 2018 by which all brick kilns were asked to switch to cleaner technology by September 2019. More than 3,000 brick kilns have shifted to cleaner technology, the Court noted. However, as per the affidavit filed by the Board in November 2022, 49 brick kilns have still not converted into cleaner technology and have not obtained consent.
Case Title: Anamika Pranav v. Anil Kumar Choudhary
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 5
The Patna High Court has reiterated that evidence given by a witness in his examination-in-chief cannot be completely discarded merely because he could not be cross-examined by the opposite party. A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra underlined that such evidence can be made admissible but weight to be attached to such testimony will depend upon the facts and circumstances.
“The evidence untested by cross-examination can have no value but the evidence cannot be rejected as inadmissible. The correct rule is that the evidence is admissible but the weight to be attached to such evidence should depend on the circumstances of each case and that though in some cases the Court may act upon it, if there is other evidence on record, its probative value may be very small and may even be disregarded,” the Court observed.
Patna High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To DSP Accused Of Raping Minor Maid In Govt Quarter
Case Title: Kamla Kant Prasad v. The State of Bihar & Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 6
The Patna High Court recently denied anticipatory bail to a suspended Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) who is accused of committing forceful sexual intercourse in 2017 with a minor girl, who was engaged as a maid for his wife.
While denying relief to the petitioner Kamla Kant Prasad, Justice Rajiv Roy observed: “The petitioner being a Police Officer was duty bound to protect the victim girl but he himself became a predator and in the process, raped her and there was no one in the government quarter to save her from the alleged act of the petitioner.”
Case Title: Nida Amina Ahmad v. The Union of India and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 7
The Patna High Court on Tuesday directed the Regional Passport Office to consider the application of a girl for issuance of fresh passport and correct her date of birth on the basis of the Matriculation certificate issued by CBSE, who was minor at the time of recording of date of birth during the issuance of previous passport.
While allowing the writ petition, the single judge bench of Justice Purnendu Singh said: “In view of the several notifications issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India contained in Circular No. VI/401/2/5/2001 dated 26.11.2015 and Circular No. VI/402/02/01/2016 dated 08.02.2017, exemption should be given to the petitioner who was minor at the time when passport with alleged incorrect date of birth was issued to her. As and when she applied after attaining the age of majority, the PIA irrespective of the duration of the issuance of passport was required to accept her case for consideration and if is satisfied with the claim and document (s) submitted by the applicant, may accept her request for change of date in the passport without imposition of any penalty.”
Case Title: Md. Sarfaraj vs. State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 8
The Patna High Court last week granted anticipatory bail to one Md. Sarfaraj @ Sharfaraj Ansari who has been accused of making 'filthy' Facebook post over Goddess Janaki and Laxman Ji.
The bench of Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan ordered that in the event of arrest or surrender of the accused before the court below within a period of six weeks from today, he be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25K with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran.
Case Title: Paramjeet Kumar (Minor) Vs. The Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 9
The Patna High Court has passed an order overturning the decision of the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya rejecting admission to a group of minor students, who had been shortlisted through a full fledged selection process, on the basis that they were not residents of the district in which the school was situated. The court has ordered the respondent school to consider the petitioner's admission based on their merit.
Case Title: DR. Amod Prabodhi Vs. The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 10
The Patna High Court has ordered the Bihar State University Service Commission (BSUSC) to re-conduct recruitment to 4,638 Assistant Professor positions in the State after it found that the earlier selection process was unlawful and in complete violation of the applicable rules of reservations as mandated by the Constitution of India.
While allowing the writ petition filed by Dr. Amod Prabodhi and various others, the single bench of Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma instructed the State government and the Commission to reopen the recruitment process after dividing the openings in accordance with the applicable law.
Case Title: Case Title: Virendra Kumar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 11
In a recent order passed by the Patna High Court, the Secretary's decision to set aside the allotment of a PDS shop to the Petitioner and award it to another candidate has been quashed and set aside.
The Petitioner had challenged the placement of the other candidate in the provisional merit list and claimed that he was entitled to be placed at No. 1. The counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner possessed better qualifications than the Respondent for the purpose of issuing a licence in terms of the Bihar Targeted PDS (Control) Order 2016.
Case Title: Shiv Kumar and Ors. vs Anil Bhagat and Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 12
In a recent judgement, a bench comprising Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra of the Patna High Court has held that the onus lies on the parties seeking an amendment to a suit to satisfy the Court that in spite of due diligence, they could not have raised the matter before the commencement of the trial. The court further held that amendments are not to be allowed merely because they are clarificatory in nature or remove any ambiguity after trial has commenced.
Case Title: Awadh Tiwari vs. The State Of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 13
A bench comprising Justice Anil Kumar Sinha of the Patna High Court has recently ruled that while examining the legality of a punishment order in a departmental enquiry, the Court should focus on identifying flaws in the decision-making process, rather than sitting upon the decision itself as an Appellate Authority.
In this case, the writ application was preferred against an order passed by Engineer-In-Chief (Central), Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, whereby a punishment order stopping 5% pension was imposed upon the petitioner in a departmental proceeding.
Case Title: Hari Shankar Yadav Vs. Dakhiya Devi
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 14
A bench comprising Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra of the Patna High Court, while allowing a civil miscellaneous petition held that a party cannot be refused just relief merely because of some mistake, negligence, inadvertence or even infraction of the rules of procedure.
In this case, the Civil Miscellaneous application was preferred for setting aside the order passed by Sub-Judge, Gaya in a Suit wherein the Sub-Judge rejected the amendment petition filed by the petitioners under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Case Title: Surendra Bahadur Singh vs. Yogendra Bahadur Singh
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 15
While dismissing a civil miscellaneous application, a bench of Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra of the Patna High Court held that the Court has the power to allow amendments in connection with claims that have become time-barred if special circumstances exist and it is in the interest of justice. However, no amendment will be permitted that introduces a new set of ideas to the detriment of any right acquired by any party through the lapse of time.
Case Title: Aditya Kumar vs. The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 16
The Patna High Court has refused anticipatory bail to IPS officer and former Superintendent of Police Aditya Kumar who had allegedly involved a conman to pose as the Chief Justice of the State in order to influence a corruption probe against him.
A bench comprising Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan said there is ample evidence against Kumar in the form of electronic evidence, which establish his connivance and active participation as a mastermind, who got the plan executed through a co-accused.
It went on to remark, "Corruption has always been a potential threat to the growth and prosperity of any Nation and that too by a person in uniform, who is supposed to keep curb over such activities."
Case Title: Deepak Kumar Vs State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 17
The Patna High Court, while acquitting an accused under the POCSO Act, has reiterated that if the defence is denied an opportunity to cross examine a witness whose statement is recorded under Section 164 or Section 161 CrPC, then such statements cannot be treated as evidence of substantive character.
The bench of Justice Alok Kumar Pandey relied upon Supreme Court's decision in R. Shaji vs. State of Kerala. It was dealing with a criminal appeal filed against the judgement of conviction under Section 366(A) (Procuration of minor girl) and 376 of the IPC read with Section 4 of POCSO Act (Punishment for penetrative sexual assault).
Case Title: Neelam Sinha vs. The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 18
In a significant order, a division bench of the Patna High Court has quashed and set-aside a decision of the Standing Committee of the High Court wherein the committee had imposed a punishment of permanent withdrawal of the entire pension of a retired Additional District and Sessions Judge after finding that he had passed judicial orders for extraneous considerations.
A bench comprising Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Harish Kumar observed, "Merely because the two orders are not justified according to the parameters of law fixed would not lead to the only inescapable conclusion that there was any extraneous consideration in passing of such orders, justifying punishment to the Judicial Officer/the petitioner."
Case Title: Jitendra vs. The State Bank Of India and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 19
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the Bank authorities to sanction a loan amount of Rs. 25 lakhs.
A single judge bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma held that a writ petition seeking mandamus to release a loan amount from a Bank was not maintainable as Banks have an exclusive domain on their treasury and also have the discretion to release loans subject to their satisfaction.
Case Title: Gammon Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd vs. The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 20
The Patna High Court has allowed the petitioner assessee to file an appeal under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (BGST Act) outside the period of limitation as envisaged under the Act since the impugned order preventing the assessee from availing the benefit of stay on the recovery of balance GST amount was passed when the Appellate Tribunal was not constituted in the state.
The division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh and Justice Madhuresh Prasad was hearing a petition seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing of the order issued by the Additional Commissioner of State Taxes, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner under section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 and Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (BGST Act) was rejected.
Case Title: Shyam Kumar Jha and Ors vs. The State Of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 21
The Patna High Court recently has quashed and set-aside the impugned orders cancelling the petitioner's PDS licence, citing violation of principles of natural justice.
A bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma observed, “The reasons must be set forth in the show-cause notice clearly outlining the various grounds on which the action under the Rules is proposed. In the absence of the grounds, the concerned licensee would be deprived of meting out with the allegations as he would not be in a position to defend himself.”
Case Title: M/s Aman Industries vs. The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 22
The Patna High Court recently granted partial relief to an entrepreneur whose land allotment was cancelled by Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority citing failure to start production after setting up of industry in Muzaffarpur.
The Court took on record petitioner's undertaking to start production in 60-90 days. A bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma observed, “any entrepreneur should be given an opportunity for setting up of an industry and starting production. There may be several reasons where a company or an industrial unit may stop production. However, the essential feature for allotment is that the industry should start production initially keeping in view the basic purpose of allotment of an industrial land.”
Case Title: Raj Kumar Yadav vs. The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 23
The Patna High Court has recently quashed and set aside a trial court's order imposing life sentence on an accused convicted for offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO). A bench comprising Justices AM Badar and Sandeep Kumar criticized the "ugly haste" shown by the trial court in disposing of the case in one day itself.
It observed, "On the day of framing of the charge itself, police papers were supplied to the accused and the entire trial came to be concluded on the very same day...Because of flagrant violation of principles of natural justice and blatant disregard to the mandatory statutory provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the impugned Judgement cannot be sustained. Rather the trial itself is vitiated. The manner in which the trial was commenced, conducted and concluded by the learned trial court clearly displays and demonstrates glaring abuse of prescribed procedure of conducting the criminal trial and, therefore, there is no alternative but to direct for De-novo trial of the accused from before the stage of framing of the charge as breach of mandatory provisions of law commenced before framing of the charge causing miscarriage of justice."
Case Title: Munakiya Devi vs. The State Of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 24
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court has allowed a writ petition seeking payment of pension arrears of the petitioner's late husband along with statutory and penal interest for the period between March, 2009 to June, 2017 from the Water Resources Department.
The bench finally held, “Pension and gratuity are welfare provisions aimed at maintaining the life of a retired employee and his/her dependents. This is compensatory in nature. The law on grant of interest on delayed payment of retiral benefit is no longer res integra. Reliance was placed on the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of State of Kerala v. M. Padmanabhan Nair reported in (1985) 1 SCC 429 and D.D. Tewari v. Uttar Haryana Bijli reported in (2014) 8 SCC 894 wherein it was held that when the employer delays the release of Pensionary benefits, it is bound to pay interest on account of the delay.”
Case Title: JK vs. RS and Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 25
The Patna High Court has said that if a girl child expresses discomfort with staying with her mother, even if it is a temporary circumstance, it is a very necessary ground to be factored in for the Family Court to opine and direct that the girl shall stay with her father.
The Division Bench of Justices Harish Kumar and Ashutosh Kumar observed: “The Court exercising parens patriae jurisdiction has to look at the child's comfort, contentment, health, education, intellectual development, favourable surroundings etc. He has thus to tread the delicate path very cautiously while deciding whether the father's claim in respect of custody and upbringing is superior or the mother's.”
Case Title: Lavkush Anupam vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 26
Observing that it is not a case where people are suffering due to any area being inaccessible, the Patna High Court recently closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directions for construction of a public road in Kaimur district. "Though further development of a road or road connectivity is an important facet of convenience for general public at large, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the issues brought before this Court, by way of instant Public Interest Litigation, has been given due attention by the Authorities, which is apparent from the affidavits.
The Government must be allowed to proceed with the matter for which administrative approval has been sought as per due priority of the road in-question having regard to various administrative and financial issues, which are essentially matters of executive policy," said the court.
Case Title: Ashok Kumar Sinha vs. State Bank of India and Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 27
Dismissing an appeal challenging the forfeiture of entire gratuity of a senior State Bank of India (SBI) officer, the Patna High Court said no other punishment could have been awarded to him for the proved charges against him.
The bank official was accused of serious irregularities. The division bench comprising Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Harish Kumar observed, "A senior officer of the Bank, who is the custodian of the money of the Bank and, in turn, the money of the investors/depositors is not expected to commit such irregularities. These irregularities are not mere lapses in the performance of the duty but are deliberate acts which has caused serious losses to the Bank and personal gain to the appellant".
Public Land With Water Body And Temple Cannot Be Settled In Anyone's Favour: Patna High Court
Case Title: Rama Prasad Singh vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 28
The Patna High Court has said that a piece of land with a water body and a temple on it cannot be settled in anyone's favour even though it may be gairmazarua public land.
The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Harish Kumar observed: “When a water-body, which is used by the public in general, and a temple, which is accessible to all the devotees, stand on the land, even though it is gairmazarua aam land, the same cannot be settled in anyone's favour, much less the appellant.”
Case Title: Amit Kumar and Ors vs. The State of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 29
The Patna High Court recently said that Section 468 of CrPC (bar to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation) has applicability in the matter of domestic violence only at the stage of Section 32 of Domestic Violence Act (cognizance and proof for breach of protection order) where question of taking cognizance is involved.
Justice Dr. Anshuman said Section 468 of CrPC does not apply in Domestic Violence Act prior to Section 32 of Domestic Violence Act.
Case Title: Ajay Kumar Madhesiy vs. The State of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 30
More than three years after his appointment was cancelled by a single judge as he was found ineligible for the Class IV post revered under Backward Class category, the Patna High Court said Sessions Division at Saran could consider a Deoria resident's case against the vacancy in General category as a one time measure.
Ajay Kumar Madhesiya, a Class IV employee, had been wrongly appointed under the Backward Class category in 2013. The division bench comprising Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Harish Kumar however made it clear that the case will not be treated as a precedent.
Case Title: X vs The State of Bihar Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 31
The Patna High Court recently overturned the conviction of an accused in a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act case, observing that no exercise was carried out by the prosecution to establish that the victim was minor on the date of occurrence.
The court also said the victim's statement is "quite contradictory" in nature on vital points. Justice Alok Kumar Pandey passed the decision on a criminal appeal against the judgement and sentencing order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-VII - POCSO, whereby the accused was convicted and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years.
Case Title: AM @ AK vs. PD
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 32
The Patna High Court has dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by a husband against an order passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Katihar, directing him to pay maintenance of Rs.4000/- per month to his wife and minor son. The petitioner had argued that grant of maintenance to the wife is barred under section 125(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) as she refused to live with him without any reasonable cause.
While rejecting the contention, Justice Dr. Anshuman observed, “Upon going through the findings recorded by the trial court on the basis of the materials available on record, it transpires to me that ingredient of section 125(4) of Cr.P.C. is not available to the petitioner as not living with the husband is not without cause.”
Case Title: Laxman Sah. and Ors vs. The State of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 33
While setting aside an order passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Nakatiaganj, the Patna High Court held that an order passed by the authority under Section 145 CrPC is in the nature of a judicial order and not an administrative order.
The bench of Justice Dr. Anshuman observed, "It transpires to this Court that passing such type of order is basically an administrative order. The officer i.e. Sub-Divisional Officer Nakatiaganj may be holding the executive post but at the time of deciding the proceeding under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. he is a quasi-judicial authority and supposed to pass a judicial order and not an administrative order. It is well established that judicial order is the order which is based upon the reasonings on the basis of materials on record and with full discussion which are absolutely lacking in this case."
Case Title: Md. Wasim Uddin vs. State of Bihar and Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 34
Dismissing a plea of the employees of Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA) for grant of pension, the Patna High Court said that notwithstanding the fact that under the BIADA Act, it is stipulated that every employee of the BIADA would be deemed to be a Public Servant within the meaning of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code, by no stretch of imagination it would make a Public servant a Government servant.
The court was dealing with the argument that appellant and other employees served the authority for all along as a public servant, as defined under Section 21 of the IPC, but the Industry Department imposed the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme on them when at the same time it provided the benefit of pension to employees of the State Government, who were transferred to and absorbed in BIADA.
Case Title: M/S Kaveri Liquors (P) Ltd vs. The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 35
The Patna High Court recently allowed a writ petition of M/S Kaveri Liquors (P) Ltd. for change of nature of its industry to a 'hotel industry' on the land allotted by Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA).
The bench of Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma observed: “The nature of an industry has not been limited to a particular field under the Act. Of course, the Policy, 2016 mentions of encouraging the industries, which are engaged in manufacturing, however, the Policy, 2016 essentially is for the purpose of encouraging the investment in State of Bihar. If the investments in a particular field are being allowed, it does not mean that the other industries are barred from being established.”
Case Title: Kanchan Kumar Mishra vs The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 36
The Patna High Court has directed the authorities to consider the case of an employee who was terminated from his service due to alleged forgery of a marksheet but was later acquitted by the trial court in the related criminal case.
The division bench of Justices Harish Kumar and Ashutosh Kumar observed that, “The engagement of the appellant was dispensed with only on account of discovery of forgery committed by the appellant by producing incorrect and forged marks-sheet of MBA resulting in institution of a criminal case. However, the said charge has ultimately not been found proved by the trial court and, as such, the cause of action has arisen in favour of the appellant to challenge the same before the appropriate forum, which fact has also suggested by the respondent in filing supplementary counter affidavit, duly sworn by the Civil Surgeon, Jamui, who has submitted before this Court that the appellant/writ petitioner has expeditious alternative remedy available before the District Magistrate, who happens to be the Chairman of District Health Society.”
Case Title: Ganga Ram Paswan vs. Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 37
The Patna High Court has held that a marriage certificate obtained under the Special Marriage Act, without proof of the fact that it was finally entered into the marriage certificate book as provided under Chapter III of the Special Marriage Act, is a mere "evidence of marriage" and not "proof of marriage in accordance with the Act".
The bench of Justice Purnendu Singh held, “Section 18 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 stipulates that where a certificate of marriage has been finally entered in the Marriage Certificate Book under Chapter III of Special Marriage Act, the marriage shall, as from the date of such entry, be deemed to be a marriage solemnized under the Act…The registration of the marriage is under Section 16 and accordingly it has to be entered into the marriage certificate book under Chapter III of the Act and from the date of entry in the marriage certificate book, the marriage is deemed to be a marriage solemnized under the Act and then only the certificate will be proof of the fact that a marriage under the Act between the petitioner and late Prema Devi has been solemnized as is also clear from Sub-Section '2' of Section 13 of the Act. The marriage certificate as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition in want of a clear provision as to whether certificate has been issued under Section 13 of Chapter II of the Act, the same can only be taken as evidence and not proof of the marriage in accordance with the Act.”
Case Title: Munilal Yadav & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 38
While dismissing a PIL seeking a direction for construction of the Additional Primary Health Centre at village Nerthua under Nerthua Panchayat on the land selected by the Gram Sabha, the Patna High Court said that a decision as to where a healthcare centre should be located is essentially an issue of executive policy and the court cannot interfere with it.
The petitioners had argued that a land admeasuring 2 acres and 34 decimal was available at a place which is nearest to the Railway Station and National Highway, however, they are under an apprehension that under pressure of superior authorities arising out of political influence, the Circle Officer has submitted a proposal of a different plot for construction of the Primary Health Centre.
Case Title: Sangeeta Rani vs. The State of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 39
“Putting a Judicial Officer to a departmental proceeding for a wrong order does not serve as a panacea for any ill which is being faced by the judiciary or for that matter any department of the Government. In fact, reckless proceeding only lowers the morale of the judiciary,” said the Patna High Court while granting relief to a woman judicial officer facing charges of 'recklessness' in passing a judgement of acquittal.
While quashing major punishment of compulsory retirement imposed upon her, the division bench of Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Harish Kumar, directed its administration for her immediate reinstatement. The punishment was modified by directing for withholding of three increments of pay with cumulative effect.
Case Title: Youth For Equality & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. along with connected pleas.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 40
"The State has no power to carry out a caste-based survey, in the manner in which it is fashioned now, which would amount to a census, thus impinging upon the legislative power of the Union Parliament," the Patna High Court today observed as it put an interim stay on a caste-based census in the State.
The bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad also called it a matter of 'grave concern' that the Government intends to share Census data with the leaders of different parties of the State Assembly, the ruling party and the opposition party.
Case Title: M/s REW Contracts Pvt Ltd vs Bihar State Power Transmission Co Ltd & Anr
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 41
The Patna High Court has ruled that an arbitration agreement executed by a Joint Venture cannot be invoked by the constituents of the said Joint Venture, since they cannot be considered as a party to the arbitration agreement.
While dealing with a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) seeking appointment of arbitrator, the bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran held that only the Joint Venture, being a separate legal entity and a party to the arbitration agreement, could invoke arbitration and not the petitioner, who was only one of the constituents of the said Joint Venture.
Case Title: Ajay Kumar vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 42
The Patna High Court has directed the Bihar Director General of Police (DGP) to review a letter dated 24-11-2020, addressed to all Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), which contains a clause stating that in case of recovery of illicit liquor in an area, the concerned Station House Officer (SHO) and Chowkidar will be 'deemed guilty' for not collecting the information and taking necessary action and they will be proceeded against for their failure and inactiveness.
Case Title: BS vs. SK and Anr
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 43
The Patna High Court recently said that the refusal for a DNA test after an allegation of adultery cannot be used to draw an inference to such an extent that the person against whom the accusation has been made "is in adulterous relation with someone because conclusive prove of D.N.A. test is not present."
Justice Dr. Anshuman said that adverse inference ought to be drawn but "but this adverse inference shall be drawn only up to that extent that no benefit should be granted to opposite party No.1 but inference cannot be drawn up to that extent that opposite party No.1 is in adulterous relation with someone because conclusive prove of D.N.A. test is not present."
Case Title: The State of Bihar and Ors. Vs. Sidharth Pratap
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 44
The Patna High Court in a recent judgement has observed that land being a natural resource belongs to the people and the State is not allowed to hand over this resource as largesse to its handpicked persons in violation of Article 14 and Article 39 (b) of the Constitution of India.
The court made the observation in its decision on an appeal against the order of a single judge directing the State Government to grant rights to the respondent (original writ petitioner) over the subject land on the basis of a sale deed which was executed by the lessee Narendra Nath Ghosh in 1947, to the great grandfather of the respondent.
Case Title: Pankaj Kumar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 45
In a recent judgment, the Patna High Court has ruled that sub-section (5A) of Section 45 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, inserted by the Finance Act, 2017, has no retrospective effect.
The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad passed the above ruling while hearing a batch of writ petitions challenging the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Some writ petitions also challenged the order issued under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act and the notice of demand issued pursuant to the assessment orders.
Case Title: Vikash Kumar Vs. The Hon'ble Patna High Court
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 46
The Patna High Court recently dismissed a petition seeking reservation for grandchildren of freedom fighters in the recruitment for the position of Assistants in the High Court.
The petition was filed by Vikash Kumar after the High Court invited online applications on 03-02-2023 from eligible candidates for appointment to 550 vacant posts of Assistants (Group B) in the Patna High Court. The advertisement detailed the available posts and the reservation provided for different categories, including Schedule Castes (SC), Schedule Tribes (ST), Extremely Backward Classes (EBC), and Economically Weaker Section (EWS). However, it did not mention any reservation for the grandchildren of freedom fighters.
Patna High Court Dismisses PIL Alleging Non-Compliance Of RTE Act By Schools In Bihar
Case Title: Prem Kumar vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 47
The Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) alleging non-compliance of the provisions of the Rights of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 by schools in Bihar.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad observed that the petitioner approached the court by making vague and sweeping allegations alleging deficiencies in implementation of the RTE Act.
Case Title: Ranjan Kumar Gupta vs. Puja Devi
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 48
The Patna High Court has said that the orders passed in cases of child custody cannot be made rigid and final and are capable of being altered, keeping in mind the needs of the child.
The court said custody orders are always considered interlocutory orders. “Under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, the Court has been empowered to pass any order or make any arrangement in respect of custody, maintenance and education of children during the pendency of the proceedings or after any decree is passed under the Act. The orders made under this section can be varied, suspended or revoked from time to time. The object of this section is to make just and proper provision for the welfare of minor child,” it said.
Patna High Court Questions State's Policy On Promotion Of Welfare Department Employees
Case Title: Rajani Kant Ojha vs. The State of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 49
Observing that transferring the employee from the post of In-Charge, District Welfare Officer to the position of Block level Welfare Officer was malafide, the Patna High Court directed the State to immediately reinstate the person to the previous position and also ordered it to initiate the process of promotion as per the Cadre Rules, 2010.
"In case, the petitioner is found entitled for promotion, the same be allowed to him within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order," said Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad.
Case Title: Koshi Vikas Sangharsh Morcha and Ors vs. Union of India and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 50
Closing proceedings in a petition seeking a second All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) in Bihar, the Patna High Court said it hopes that both the Central Government and the State Government would expedite the process of the establishment of the hospital as the same "would definitely inure to the benefit of the residents of the Bihar and would be a major step in providing quality tertiary health care".
The court was hearing a petition filed by Koshi Vikas Sangharsh Morcha for establishment of state's second AIIMS under the Pradhan Mantri Swasthya Suraksha Yojana (PMSSY) in Saharsa district.
The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad said: "These are all policy matters where this Court would hesitate to interfere in and it involves a lot of deliberations, compliances of requirements and conditions which cannot be precipitated by issuance of a writ of mandamus."
Case Title: Md. Ishakh vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 51
The Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking an inquiry into the alleged malpractice and irregularities in issuance of Ration Cards in fictitious names in Bihar. The petitioner had placed on record certain alleged irregularities with reference to a particular dealer under the Public Distribution System and had also mentioned names of family members of certain Ration Card holders.
While referring to the provisions of the Bihar Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2016, the division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad observed that there are adequate remedies available for inspection of fair price shops and action to be taken against the licensee in the appropriate circumstances for violation of the terms of license or unfair practices.
Case Title: Kumar Gaurav vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 52
The Patna High Court has said the police, before carrying out a verification exercise, must first mention the name of the complainant, his details and gist of the complaint in the station diary and then proceed for verification.
“If the police get any complaint, it should at least mention the name of the complainant, his details and a gist of the complaint in the station diary before proceeding to verify the allegations,” a bench of Justice Sandeep Kumar observed.
Case Title: Om Prakash Tiwari vs. BCCI & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 53
The Patna High Court has directed the District Magistrate, Patna to conclude enquiry into the allegations of illegalities in the elections to the Bihar Cricket Association within a period of 45 days.
The court was hearing a petition seeking a direction upon the District Magistrate, Patna to conclude the enquiry as directed by the Inspector General, Prohibition, Excise and Registration, Government of Bihar relating to illegalities committed in the elections to the governing body of the Bihar Cricket Association.
Case Title: Congress Maidan Bachao Samiti vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 54
Observing that it is for the Bihar Pradesh Congress Committee to fight against any encroachment of Congress Maidan, the Patna High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation filed by the Congress Maidan Bachao Samiti in this regard. The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad noted that admittedly, the Congress Maidan belongs to the Bihar Pradesh Congress Committee, in whose name the Jamabandi has also been created in the revenue records.
"We are unable to perceive any public interest being agitated specially when the property is in private ownership. It is for the owner in whose name Jamabandi has been created to fight against any encroachment and we see no reason to entertain the instant writ petition," said the court.
Case Title: Dhananjay Seth vs. The Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 55
In a significant ruling, the Patna High Court has said that banks and finance companies cannot use recovery agents to forcefully seize vehicles of customers who have defaulted on car loans, without following the proper procedure under law.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad while disposing of a batch of pleas filed by aggrieved petitioners against the action of the contesting respondents, namely, Tata Motor Finance Limited, IndusInd Bank Limited, Shri Ram Finance Company, ICICI Bank, and the State Bank of India.
Patna High Court Dismisses PIL Against Bihar Govt's Decision To Empanel Shooters For Shooting Vermin
Case Title: Sunil Kumar vs. State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 56
The Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation challenging the State government's decision to constitute a committee for the empanelment of shooters for the purpose of shooting vermin in Bihar.
The petition had further challenged the letters detailing necessary requirements for such empanelment and the method of evaluation of the shooters to be empanelled.
Case Title: M/s DEN Networks Limited Versus The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 57
The Patna High Court has held that the power to collect entertainment tax would no longer vest in the state after the 101st Amendment. The bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad has observed that the 101st Constitution Amendment Act substituted Entry 62 of List II to the extent that the power to levy and collect entertainment tax was bestowed only upon local self-government institutions and not the state.
Case Title: Ms. Anshuman Shreya (Advocate) In person vs. The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 58
The Patna High Court has dismissed a petition seeking directions for development of Maa Chandika Sthan in Munger district, based on the project report prepared by the District Municipal Commissioner, and to initiate specific schemes and programmes for development of tourism in the area to generate employment opportunity and better livelihood conditions for people residing in the district.
Observing that it is State's responsibility to ensure that employment opportunities are made available for people across the state, the division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy observed, “We do not see any public interest involved in the above prayers except for seeking employment to the locals of a particular district; which the State Government has a responsibility to seek to ensure all over the State. However, this does not come in a day, or on judicial orders issued by us.”
Case Title: Shambhu Nath Sikari vs. The State of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 59
The Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking to set aside a memorandum issued by the Health Department of the Bihar Government requiring all governmental and non-governmental organizations to transfer their affiliation from Aryabhatt Knowledge University to Bihar Health Sciences University.
The petitioner, Shambhu Nath Sikari, alleged that the affiliation transfer was directed without providing basic and adequate infrastructure, lacking a proper roadmap, and suggested a political motive. However, the court noted the absence of any further details to support these claims.
Patna High Court Directs Bihar Chief Secretary To Monitor Revival Work Of Moti Jheel In Motihari
Case Title: Kumar Amit vs. The Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 60
The Patna High Court has directed the Chief Secretary to monitor the revival of Moti Jheel through an officer authorized by him.
The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad asked the Chief Secretary to authorize the officer to suitably monitor the revival work personally. The authorized officer has been directed by the court to file a report every three months before the Chief Secretary.
Case Title: Ram Bahadur Pandey and Ors vs. Union of India and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 61
Dismissing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a direction to the Railways to provide a level crossing facility between K.M. 14.10 and K.M. 14.11 on the Sugauli-Raxaul Railway line near Ramgarhwa Railway Station, the Patna High Court said it is not feasible for the Railways to provide level crossing at every spot where a road crosses the railway line.
The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad further said that in fact, if blockade is created it would effectively prevent trespass and protect the villagers from loss of life due to collision by a running train.
Patna High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Construction Of Civil Court Building In Shahpur Patori
Case Title: Rajesh Kumar Singh vs The State of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 62
The Patna High Court has recently dismissed a plea seeking construction of a Civil Court building in city's Shahpur Patori area in Samastipur district.
“We are afraid that there is no public interest discernible from the aforesaid prayers made which is almost in the nature of seeking information for which there are adequate remedies available under the Right to Information Act, 2005,” a division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy said.
Case Title: Nikhil Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 63
The Patna High Court has disposed of 31 Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petitions seeking establishment of airports in almost all districts of Bihar.
“In our opinion, the writ petitions would not be maintainable, especially as a Public Interest Litigation, since it is a purely policy matter of the respective Governments to decide on the establishment of airports, the land to be acquired and so on and so forth; wherein financial viability also becomes a very important consideration. The very claim raised in all the 31 writ petitions is to have an airport in every district of Bihar. We cannot but say, it shocks the judicial mind, especially considering the jurisdictional power to interfere in such policy matters,” said the division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad.
Case Title: Umesh Kumar Singh vs The State of Bihar and Ors With Prakash Kumar Bhatt vs The State of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 64
The Patna High Court has refused to order a CBI probe into the alleged violations by the state transport department and the National Informatics Centre (NIC) in registration of vehicles, particularly the old BS-III vehicles.
The two PILs, which sought an investigation into the alleged corrupt practices and collusion, were disposed of by the court, expressing satisfaction with the Transport Department's action.
Case Title: Hero Cycle Limited And Anr Vs. Hero Ecotech Limited And Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 65
The Patna High Court has dismissed Punjab-based Hero Cycle Limited's petition against a Patna Court's decision to recall its order of debarring the defendants from filing written statement in a 2014 trademark infringement suit.
Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra noted that the Supreme Court, while restoring injunction granted in favour of Hero Cycle in 2016, had requested the trial court to expedite the trial and complete the same as early as possible.
Patna High Court Rejects Sherghati College's Plea For Retrospective Affiliation For 2020-21 Session
Case Title: Vijay Shankar Rai vs. The State of Bihar and Ors
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 66
The Patna High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the management of Prof. Vijay Shankar Rai Mahila College, Sherghati, Gaya, for retrospective affiliation of the college from the academic year 2020-21. The court also declined to issue a directive for a special examination for the students of session 2019-20.
Justice Anil Kumar Sinha said the doctrine of legitimate expectation as argued by the petitioner is not applicable in the facts of the case as there was no representation on part of the State that the college can admit students pending proposal of affiliation or recognition.
Case Title: Maharana Singh vs. The State of Bihar and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 67
The Patna High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed in the form of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning the guidelines issued by the Chief Election Officer of the Bihar State Election Authority regarding the election to the Managing Committee of the Vyapar Mandal Co-operative Societies.
The bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad observed, “The election to the Vyapar Mandal is required to be conducted in terms of co-operative movement under the provisions of Bihar Co-operative Societies Act and Rules framed thereunder.”
Case Title: Mahendra Singh vs The State of Bihar and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 68
The Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought the issuance of a direction to construct the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan of Gram Panchayat Raj in Amaithi, at Sasaram in the village of Masona. The petitioner, Mahendra Singh, a resident of Masona, argued that construction should be prioritized in his village due to its higher population compared to Susadi village.
The court ruled that decisions regarding the construction of government buildings, such as the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan, are within the purview of the concerned state authorities and cannot be the subject of a PIL.
Case Title: Rajnish Singh @ Rajnish Kumar @ Chuhwa vs. The State of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 69
Patna High Court has directed the District Magistrate, Patna to re-evaluate the cancellation of an arms license, stating that the mere existence of a complaint is insufficient grounds for revocation unless it poses a threat to public peace or safety.
The above direction was issued by Justice Harish Kumar while disposing of a writ application filed by one, Rajnish Singh, who sought to implement an order from the Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, to reinstate the arms license.
Case Title: Rovins Kumar vs. The Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga and Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 70
While interpreting a clause in the recruitment advertisement which stated that preference had to be given to female candidates, the Patna High Court observed that the plea of preference to a female candidate would have no meaning when merit of other candidates have not at all been considered and such female candidate has been directly appointed.
The court made the observation while quashing the appointment and regularization of a woman candidate on the post of Librarian in the Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Women's Institute of Technology. The court granted the Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga, a liberty to make fresh appointment on the post of Librarian in accordance with law and after giving opportunity to all eligible candidates.
Case Title: Swati Swarnim vs. The State of Bihar and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 71
The Patna High Court has dismissed a petition challenging a rule requiring the candidates to secure minimum qualifying marks of 35 percent at the interview stage of 31st Bihar Judicial Services Examination.
The division bench of Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Harish Kumar dismissed a petition filed by Swati Swarnim, a law graduate from Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar Bihar University against the rule prescribing 35 percent qualifying marks at interview stage of Civil Judge (Junior Division) exam held by the by the Bihar Public Service Commission.
Case Title: Jai Kishor vs The State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 72
The Patna High Court has commuted the death penalty awarded to a 26-year-old in a case of rape and murder to life imprisonment with no premature release or remission before undergoing actual imprisonment for a period of 25 years.
“In the present case, the appellant, on the date of filing of the appeal in 2021, was 24 years. He has a family with his wife and two infants, as has emerged from the materials on record. There is nothing on record to demonstrate that he has any criminal antecedent. Further, there is nothing against him as regards his jail conduct,” said the court.
'Temporary Employee With Over 15 Years Of Continuous Service Eligible For Pension': Patna High Court
Case Title: The Registrar General, Patna High Court vs. Ram Vyas and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 73
Observing even if an employee has served in a temporary capacity without confirmation, their service can be considered for pension benefits if it is continuous and exceeds 15 years, the Patna High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by its Registrar General against a single judge's ruling. The single judge had asked the high court to consider an Ex-Cadre Assistant's period of temporary service for release of pension.
Srijan Scam: Patna High Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Accused In Money Laundering Case
Case Title: Pranav Kumar Ghosh Vs. The Union Of India And Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 74
The Patna High Court has rejected the bail application of Pranav Kumar Ghosh, an accused in a money laundering case related to the "Srijan Scam". Ghosh, a former Secretary of Srijan Mahila Vikas Sahyog Samiti Limited (SMVSSL), was arrested in 2021.
The predicate offences relate to alleged fraudulent transfers and misappropriation of huge sums of government money under a conspiracy between government officials, bank employees and office bearers and members of SMVSSL.
Case Title: Virendra Thakur vs. The State of Bihar and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 75
The Patna High Court has imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on the Siwan district administration for non-compliance of a 2017 court order, and has directed that the amount be deposited into the Prime Minister's Relief Fund within two months.
“Instead of framing charges in the contempt proceedings, we proposed to impose a cost of Rs. 50,000/-, it is quantified in view of delay in implementation of the Court's Order for about six years. The cost shall be remitted in the Prime Minister's Relief Fund within a period of 2 months. The same shall be reported in the Registry of this Court. For compliance of the remaining portion of the order, further four months' time is granted,” the division bench of Justice P. B. Bajanthri and Justice Jitendra Kumar ordered.
Case Title: Meena Kumari Sinha vs. The State of Bihar and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 76
Case Title: Sudama Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 77
The Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) alleging illegal construction within the 100-meter radius of the Bodhgaya Temple, which was declared a World Heritage Site UNESCO in 2001.
"It is trite law that there cannot be repeated petitions filed for the very same relief before the High Court; even when it is in public interest, especially by the very same petitioner," the division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy said.
Case Title: Palak Bharti vs. The State Of Bihar and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 78
The Patna High Court has upheld the decision of the State Election Commission, Bihar, to disqualify a candidate who despite belonging to a Scheduled Tribe had contested from a seat reserved for Scheduled Castes. The court said that only members of the community for which seats are reserved can contest elections on those specific seats.
“As she belongs to 'Tharu' caste under Scheduled Tribe category by virtue of her father being a 'Tharu' caste, she was not entitled to file nomination for a seat which is reserved for Scheduled caste female” said the bench of Justice Rajiv Roy.
Case Title: Shobha Singh vs. The State of Bihar and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 79
The Patna High Court has said that a person cannot be held responsible for any dues owed by their family members while seeking the renewal of a permanent stage carriage permit.
Justice A Abhishek Reddy said, "it is made clear that the renewal of the permit of the petitioner cannot be rejected on the sole ground that any of the family members are due some amount."
The ruling was passed in the case of Shobha Singh, who sought direction for the Magadh Regional Transport Authority in Gaya and the Joint Commissioner-Cum-Secretary of the Mangadh Regional Transport Authority in Gaya to grant and issue permanent stage carriage permits for the route from Aurangabad to Patna, Gandhi Maidan, via Aurangabad, Arwal, Pali, Bihta, and Jagdev Patha (route no. 969) for buses which are operated by the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation (BSRTC).
Case Title: M/S Sangam Wires vs. The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 80
While observing that a petitioner's response to the show cause is required to be considered after due opportunity of hearing, in accordance with the statutory provisions, the Patna High Court has overturned the penalty imposed on a petitioner for moving goods without a valid e-way bill. The Court ruled that no penalty under Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act could be imposed without providing a hearing as prescribed under Section 129(4) of the Act.
Case Title: Sakindar Yada Vs.The State Of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 81
Citing the failure to establish the age of the minor victim, the Patna High Court has acquitted two accused, who were convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in 2017.
“Establishing the minority of the victim child is a condition precedent to proceeding with a case under the POCSO Act. However, in the present case, there is no such finding by the learned trial court regarding whether the victim was a child at the time of the alleged occurrence. Non-compliance with such procedural requirements amounts to a failure of justice, and the benefit should certainly go in favor of the accused,” the bench of Justices Sudhir Singh and Chandra Prakash Singh held.
Case Title: Manoj Kumar and Another vs. The State of Bihar and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 82
The Patna High Court has directed the Bihar School Examination Board to pay a monetary compensation of Rs 2 Lakh to a girl who was wrongly declared 'fail' in a paper of the Secondary School Examination, 2017 (Annual) conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board.
“In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the fact that the petitioner no. 2 being a girl student who had in fact passed her matriculation examination in 1st division but because of the irresponsible act of the Board and its officials, she has suffered in her life and has lost her valuable time and studies which cannot be otherwise compensated, this Court directs the Board to pay a sum of Rs.2 lakhs to the petitioner no. 2 as compensation and Rs. 25,000/- as cost of litigation,” ordered Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad.
Case Title: Navalkishor Singh Son vs The State of Bihar And Others Civil
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 83
The Patna High Court has directed the Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar to clear the retiral dues of a former employee within a period of six weeks.
Justice Purnendu Singh ordered the the Vice-Chancellor and Registrar of the University to make payment of all the retiral dues including pension along with statutory interest admissible to the former Night Guard in accordance with law within a period of six weeks.
Case Title: Neeta Tripathi @ Dr. Nita Tripathi Vs. State Of Bihar
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 84
The Patna High Court has quashed the proceedings in a criminal case against a doctor, who was accused of negligence during a hysterectomy in 2012.
Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh, observed, “There is difference between 'Negligence' and 'Criminal Negligence' and it is only criminal negligence which can be tried by a criminal court. For 'Negligence' to amount to offence, element of mens rea must exist. So long doctor follows practice acceptable to medical profession of that day, he cannot be held liable for negligence.”
Case Title: SK vs. RD
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 85
While dismissing a man's revision plea against the Family Court's rejection of his matrimonial case for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Patna High Court said the inability to bear a child is not a valid ground for dissolving a marriage.
The court noted that it appears since the wife is having a cyst in her uterus and is unable to bear child, the husband wants to divorce her to get remarried with another woman so that he can have a child. The division bench of Justice Jitendra Kumar and Justice P. B. Bajanthri said that developing any disease during the continuation of marriage is not within the control of any spouse.
Case Title: Income Tax Officer vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 86
The Patna High Court has upheld the principle of consistency in taxation matters, asserting that the Revenue cannot challenge a declaration of law accepted in one case while challenging its correctness in another case without just cause.
Quoting several judgments of the Apex Court, the Court held, "The established principle is that, if the Revenue has not challenged a declaration of law laid down by a High Court and accepted it in the case of one assessee, then it is not open to the Revenue to challenge its correctness in the case of other assessees, without just cause."
Case Title: Radhe Sharma v. Chief Secretary, Mines and Geology & others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 87
The Patna High Court has granted anticipatory-arrest bail to a man, who was booked for violating Bihar Minor Mineral Concessions Rules, 1972 and the Environment (Protection) Act, on the condition of planting 500 trees.
The counsel appearing for the mines department submitted that if the petitioner is ready to plant 500 trees in the area specified by the District Mines Officer, Sheikhpura and also undertakes to take responsibility for their up-keeping for a period of six months, he has no objection if the privilege of bail is granted to the petitioner. The plants will be given to the petitioner free of cost, he added.
Patna HC Dismisses Pleas Challenging Bihar Govt's Decision To Conduct Caste-Based Survey In State
Case Title - Youth For Equality and others vs. State of Bihar and others along with connected matters
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 88
The Patna High Court today dismissed pleas challenging the decision of the Bihar Government to conduct a caste-based survey in the State. The High Court, has in effect, paved the way for a caste-based survey in the state.
After hearing a total of 5 PIL pleas challenging various aspects of the survey, a bench of Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy had reserved the verdict in the matter back on July 7.
Case Title - Youth For Equality and others vs. State of Bihar and others along with connected matters
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 88
Terming the Bihar Government's decision to conduct a caste-based survey in the State as “perfectly valid initiated with due competence”, the Patna High Court on Tuesday dismissed a bunch of pleas challenging the State Government's initiative.
The High Court's decision has paved for a caste survey in the state, the further work of which was stayed (as an interim measure) by the HC on May 4.
Patna High Court Deprecates State Tax Authority's Conduct; Orders Restoration Of Refund Application
Case Title: Progressive Constructions Limited vs. The State of Bihar and Another
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 89
In a significant ruling, the Patna High Court criticized the State Tax Authority for its handling of a refund application filed by Progressive Constructions Limited and set aside the impugned order. The court, in its judgment, expressed strong disapproval of the Officer's conduct and restored the refund application before the appropriate authority.
The case revolved around the refund application filed by Progressive Constructions Limited, which was dismissed by the Officer entrusted with the statutory authority to consider such applications. The dismissal of the refund application was based on the grounds that the Department intended to challenge the Tribunal's order before the High Court, and hence, there was no finality on the matter.
Patna High Court Orders Railways To Refund Illegal VAT Deduction from Contractors' Bills
Case Title: PCM Cement Concrete Pvt. Ltd vs. The Union of India and Others
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 90
In a significant ruling, the Patna High Court has directed the Indian Railways to refund an amount of Rs. 38,22,897 to PCM Cement Concrete Pvt. Ltd., following an illegal VAT deduction made from the bills of the contractor.
The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy held, “The transaction was purely of an inter-state sale of goods and is not a works contract nor a sale of goods eligible to tax within the State of Bihar. The sale of goods as per Annexure-2 and Annexure-5 agreements constitute an inter-state sale not eligible for tax within the State of Bihar.”
Case Title: Shailja Vajpe vs. The Patna Municipal Corporation and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 91
In an unusual move, the Patna High Court held a hearing on a Sunday and instructed its registry to launch a contempt case against five officials of the Patna Municipal Corporation (PMC). The action comes in response to the deliberate defiance of the court's order, whereby the officials proceeded with the demolition of a building on Saturday, despite the order reserved in the case on Friday.
A division bench of Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy opined, “We are prima facie of the opinion that there is deliberate contempt made out from the facts noticed above and the demolition carried out on Saturday is without any further notice to the appellant and is in total violation of the interim orders. We also arrive at the finding after having questioned the Commissioner of the Patna MunicipalCorporation, whose deposition is annexed herewith. We further reckon the statement made by the respondent in the appeal that he had specific orders from 'above'. Howsoeverhigh the order came from, it cannot be from one above the law.”
Case Title: Rajanish Kumar Mishra and Others vs. The State of Bihar and Others
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 92
The Patna High Court has recently rejected a writ petition lodged by 117 'Niyojit' [contract] teachers who alleged discrimination meted out to them by denying grade pay for a period of two years from the initial appointment.
The teachers, who were also trained professionals, contended that they were unfairly denied grade pay, a privilege granted to trained teachers in regular government employment.
Case Title: Rakesh Kumar @ Chandan Mandal And One Another Vs. The State Of Bihar Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 93
Citing non-examination of the injured victim and the trial court's failure to appreciate the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the Patna High Court has set aside the conviction of two for alleged offence of attempted murder punishable under Section 307, read in conjunction with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Justice Alok Kumar Pandey observed, "In the present appeal, from perusal of initial version of FIR, it is crystal clear that even the informant is not eye witness of the alleged occurrence as he arrived at the place of occurrence after hearing noise and he is not victim of the present case. The victim, who is mother of the informant, sustained injury but she has not been produced before the court for adducing evidence."
Case Title: Reshma Prasad vs. State of Bihar and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 94
"Transgender is not a caste identity and every individual, including those not conforming to the male/female gender classification, should be permitted self determination," the Patna High Court has held.
The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy added that the Bihar government has erred in including transgender persons under the caste enumeration for its Caste Survey of 2022.
Politician Not Disabled From Being Appointed As State Food Commission Chairman: Patna High Court
Case Title: Veterans Forum for Transparency in Public vs The State of Bihar and Others
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 95
While observing that there can be no disability found in a politician for appointment to the post of a Chairperson of Food Commission, the Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) contesting the appointment of Vidyanand Vikal as the Chairman of the Bihar State Food Commission.
The PIL was filed by the Veterans Forum for Transparency in Public Life, which sought to challenge Vikal's appointment on the grounds of his political background and alleged lack of expertise in matters concerning food and nutrition.
Case Title: M/s Aastha Enterprises vs The State of Bihar and Another
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 96
The Patna High Court recently ruled that Input Tax Credit (ITC) should be regarded as a benefit or concession rather than an inherent right granted to taxpayers within the framework of the law. The court's decision emphasized that the availability of ITC to a purchasing dealer is contingent not only upon the seller's tax collection but also on the seller's proper remittance of the collected tax to the government. In this context, the onus of proving that the tax collected by the seller has indeed been paid to the government rests with the taxpayer seeking the credit.
Case Title - Nisha Gupta vs. Uday Chand Gupta
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 97
On Friday, the Patna High Court set aside a judgment of the family court granting a divorce decree in favour of the Husband as it noted that he had failed to prove the ground of cruelty purportedly committed by his wife against him.
The Court added that in fact, cruelty had been committed against the wife as the husband had left his house and started residing in the office of RSS.
Case title - Akrity Aishwarya vs The State of Bihar and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 98
In an attempt to manage the population of stray dogs, the Patna High Court has directed the Chief Secretary, the Director General of Police and the Secretary of the Panchayati Raj Department to frame guidelines for early rehabilitation of stray dogs as well as to prevent their multiplication.
"The District Administration will do well to issue notices to its officers both in the Revenue and Police Department as also those in the Local Administration, to keep a watchful eye on the stray dogs and prevent multiplication and early rehabilitation on spotting of stray dogs and thus attempting to nip the problem at the budding stage," the Court said while dealing with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea to stop the killing of stray dogs by 'inhuman method of shooting'.
Case Title: Shankar Kumar vs. The State of Bihar and Anr
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 99
The Patna High Court has granted pre-arrest bail to Shankar Kumar, an agent of Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Limited who is accused of not re-paying the matured amount of the depositors including complainants. Kumar is booked for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 406, 420, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, along with Section 34.
Justice Purnendu Singh granted anticipatory bail upon considering that the petitioner had given an undertaking to actively cooperate with the complainant.
Case Title: Satyam Abhishek vs State of Bihar and Others
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 100
The Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the notification for the selection of candidates to the positions of constables in the Bihar Police and Bihar Special Armed Police.
A division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy observed, “We do not find any arbitrariness in fixing a cut-off date for acquisition of qualification and also satisfying the stipulation as to upper and minimum age limit. It is for the Appointing Authority to determine such things and if there is no colourable exercise or arbitrariness; this Court cannot set aside such stipulations.”
Violates Minority Institution's Rights U/Article 30: Patna HC Reads Down Amendment Requiring Selection Committee "Approval" For Appointing Teachers
Case Title: Noor Alam Khan vs. The State of Bihar and Others
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 101
In a significant verdict, the Patna High Court has ruled that affiliated and minority educational institutions in the state of Bihar will now only need to consult their respective university administration rather than seeking "approval" in matters related to the appointment, promotion, dismissal, discharge, removal from service and termination of service or demotion of teachers .
The court's decision comes in response to two writ applications challenging section 4(5) of the Bihar State Universities (Amendment) Act, 2013, which substituted section 57A of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976. The petitioners argued that the amended section infringed upon the rights of minority educational institutions guaranteed under Article 30(1) of the Indian Constitution.
Entering Into Second Marriage Even With Wife's Consent May Constitute Cruelty: Patna High Court
Case Title: Arun Kumar Singh Alias Arun Singh vs. Nirmala Devi
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 102
The Patna High Court has held that entering into a second marriage, even with the consent of the first wife, may constitute cruelty to the first wife, thereby giving her reason to live separately and giving cause of action to file complaint cases under Section 498A of the IPC.
The division bench of Justices Jitendra Kumar and PB Bajanthri observed, “As such, even lodging of criminal cases under Section 498A of the IPC by the Respondent-wife cannot be construed as cruelty to the Appellant-husband. After perusal of the averment made in the petition, we further find that as per averment of the Appellant-husband, he has entered into second marriage, though allegedly with the consent of the Respondent- wife.”
Case Title: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Satish Kumar Keshri
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 103
The Patna High Court has held that completed assessments can be interfered with by the Assessing Officer while making the assessment under Section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of the search.
The bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy has upheld the Tribunal's Order and observed that the Tribunal was perfectly within the statutory framework in making a remand directing the Assessing Officer to carry out a re-assessment of the assessment year 2002-03, which stood completed as of the date of initiation of Section 153A proceedings if some incriminating material seized during the search is available.
Order Of Sessions Judge To Transfer Case Not Appealable U/S 407 CrPC: Patna High Court
Case Title: Prushotam Yadav @ Chotu Vs. The State Of Bihar And Anr LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 114
The Patna High Court while providing clarification regarding the appealability of an order issued by Sessions Judges under Section 408 CrPC for the transfer of a case, has affirmed that such orders are not appealable under Section 407 CrPC.
Section 408 empowers Sessions Judge to transfer cases and appeals from one Criminal Court to another Criminal Court in his sessions division. Section 407 pertains to power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals. Sub-section (2) thereof provides that no application shall lie to the High Court for transferring a case from one Criminal Court to another Criminal Court in the same sessions division, unless an application for such transfer has been made to the Sessions Judge and rejected by him.
Case Title: Kumod Mandal Vs. The State Of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Pat) 115
The Patna High Court has overturned conviction in a case involving sexual offenses against a minor due to the failure of the trial court to determine the victim's age, after an issue in that regard was raised by the accused.
The Court emphasized that it is the trial court's duty to ascertain the age of the victim, especially when it is challenged during the proceedings under Section 34(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
Case Title: Rambilash Mahto and Others vs. The State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Pat) 116
The Patna High Court has set aside a 27 year old rioting and murder convictions qua six persons, while underscoring the significance of conducting a thorough and impartial inquiry of the accused as per Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. The Court further observed that the omission to examine the Investigating Officer potentially harmed the defense's interests in this case.
A Division Bench of Justices Sudhir Singh and Chandra Prakash Singh held, “It is trite law that the examination of accused under this section should not be held in a perfunctory manner. The accused must be afforded reasonable opportunity to explain the circumstances appearing against him. Therefore, while examining the accused, trial Court should be mindful of the object underlying this provision.”
Case Title: Manoj Kumar Gupta vs. The Union of India
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 117
Upholding the right of a disciplined security force to transfer its personnel in the interest of better administration, the Patna High Court emphasized that transfers are inherent to the job and can only be challenged if they are punitive, malafide, or if the ordering authority does not possess the power to transfer, or if the post is non-transferable.
The court expressed its reluctance to evaluate administrative orders, particularly when the presented circumstances are not exceptionally compelling to disturb a reasonable person, prompting them to challenge the administrative efficiency cited.
Case Title: Rohitash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 118
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to a Border Security Force (BSF) Jawan accused of cheating and raping a woman under the false pretext of marriage. The accused, known to the informant for six years, was alleged to have engaged in a consensual physical relationship. The Court found no evidence suggesting the promise of marriage was false from the beginning.
The ruling came in an application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for anticipatory bail in connection with a 2022 case registered for offenses punishable under Sections 493 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Subsequently, after further investigation, the case was converted into Sections 420/376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Case Title: Smt. Abha Kumari vs. The State Of Bihar and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 119
Setting aside an "unreasoned" punishment order passed by the Special Secretary of the Social Welfare Department against a Child Development Project Officer, the Patna High Court has emphasized the critical need for clear and coherent reasoning in decision-making processes.
Justice Mohit Kumar Shah observed, “It is evident from the records, as narrated by the learned counsel for the petitioner and recorded hereinabove in the preceding paragraphs that the present case is a case of no evidence. This Court further finds that the impugned order dated 30.6.2015 is not only cryptic but also an unreasoned order, depicting complete non-application of mind inasmuch as the same has not taken into account the defence put forth by the petitioner, apart from no clear, cogent and succinct reasons, having been furnished by the Respondent No. 3, for coming to a decision warranting infliction of punishment upon the petitioner.”
Case Title: Deepak Mandal vs The State Of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 120
The Patna High Court, upholding the convictions of five individuals for kidnapping under Sections 364 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), has held that despite certain lapses in the investigation, the case of prosecution cannot be dismissed if evidence of the victim is reliable.
A division bench of Justices Alok Kumar Pandey and Ashutosh Kumar observed, “The contention of the learned APP is quite tenable in the light of the fact that the statement of victim remained intact, throughout the trial. On the other hand, the contention of the appellants on the point of motive and the lapses on the part of the I.O. are not tenable in the light of the eye witness account. The investigation appears to have been conducted in faulty manner. But only due to the unprofessionalism of the I.O., the case of prosecution cannot be thrown out.”
Case Title: Shri Giridhar Gopal Vs Smt. Ramavati Devi
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 121
The Patna High Court has underscored that a court can add parties in a lawsuit if deemed necessary for effective adjudication, regardless of the plaintiff's preferences. The judgment further emphasizes that the mere addition of an intervener as a party does not inherently create an interest in the disputed property.
Justice Sunil Dutt Mishra observed, "Mere addition of the intervenor as a party will not create an interest in the suit property and in considered view of this Court the presence of the intervenor is necessary for efficacious adjudication of this case and addition is also necessary for avoidance of multiplicity of suit."
Case Title: Khusboo Kumari vs. The State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 122
The Patna High Court while overturning the convictions of eight individuals in a murder case, has opined that the mere discovery of weapons, specifically pistols and cartridges, based on the confessions of the accused, without the input of a ballistic expert, was insufficient to establish the charge under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The division bench of Justices Sudhir Singh and Chandra Prakash Singh held, “...the recovery of two country made pistols and two 315 bore live cartridges is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the appellants regarding the commission of the alleged offence. Moreover, there was no attempt made by the prosecution to obtain the opinion of a ballistic expert to ascertain whether the bullet could have been fired from the recovered weapon.”
Case Title: Chandradev Yadav Vs The State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 123
In a crucial ruling, the Patna High Court emphasized the fundamental principle of natural justice, stating that any authority under the law must issue notice to the affected party before passing any prejudicial order, and the authority should only make a decision after the affected party has had an opportunity to be heard.
Justice Sandeep Kumar observed, “Any authority under law before passing any order prejudicial to a party must issue notice to the affected party and will pass the order only after appearance of the affected party and after hearing him. In the present case, from perusal of the order dated 24.08.2019 passed by the Additional Collector, Khagaria and also on going through the averments made by the petitioner, which has not been denied by the State or the private respondents, it is clear that the petitioner was never heard by Additional Collector, Khagaria before passing the impugned order dated 24.08.2019.”
Case Title: M/s Cohesive Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd vs The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Pat) 128
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court has granted relief to M/s Cohesive Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd, the petitioner, in a Goods and Services Tax (GST) dispute. The division bench comprising Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy allowed a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking various reliefs. The petitioner essentially was desirous of availing statutory remedy of appeal against the impugned order before the Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal" ) under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "B.G.S.T. Act").
Case Title: M/s S K Construction and Company vs vs The State of Bihar and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 Livelaw (Pat) 129
The Patna High Court has ruled that the Appellate Authority, by dismissing the appeal without providing any reasoning and questioning the proper presentation of the appeal, would be abdicating its powers as mandated by the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act.
The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy observed, “We have already held in Purushottam Stores vs. The State of Bihar & Ors; CWJC No. 4349 of 2023 decided on 25.04.2023; looking at the provisions of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act especially sub-sections (8), (9), (10), (11) and (12) of Section 107 of the Act, that the Appellate Authority has a duty and an obligation under the statute to look into the merits of the matter and also examine the grounds raised by the appellant, even if there is no presence recorded of the appellant before the Appellate Authority and decide the issue on merits.”
Patna High Court Awards Rs. 5 Lakh Compensation To Widow For 15-Yrs Delayed Pension Payment
Case Title: Mostt. Jaymanti Dev vs The State of Bihar and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 130
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court has awarded a monetary compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- (five lac) to a widow, reprimanding the callous attitude of State Government officials because of whom she faced a 15-year delay in receiving her husband's pension and other retiral dues. The Court expressed deep concern over the negligence displayed by State Government officials, particularly the Block Development Officer, the Circle Officer, and the District Magistrate, in addressing the petitioner's situation.
Case Title: Siwan Zila Mukhiya Sangh through its Chairman Ajay Bhasker Chauhan vs. The State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 131
In a recent legal ruling, Patna High Court while upholding the Bihar government's Solar Light Scheme aimed at rural electrification and ensuring well-lit village streets at night, emphasized the scheme's core objective of enhancing security and convenience for rural communities while promoting development across various sectors.
Justice Harish Kumar observed, “The object of the Solar Light Scheme to ensure rural electrification in the Panchayat is clear and loud that the village streets remain well lighted during the night in the villages imbibing the sense of security and lessening the inconvenience and discomfort to the populace and to ensure development in all the fields.”
Case Title: Dasrath Ram Vs. The State Of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 132
In a notable development, the Patna High Court has acquitted a man, who had been convicted and sentenced in connection with a murder case dating back 18 years citing procedural lapses and failure on the part of the prosecution.
The Court, while expressing concern over the lack of diligence in the trial court's proceedings, observed that the examination of the accused under Section 313 of the CrPC, a crucial stage where the court elucidates incriminating materials, was treated as a mere formality.
Case Title: Rakesh Kumar Alias Rakesh Kumar Singh Alias Raku vs. The State of Bihar and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 133
The Patna High Court has ruled that the seizure of an entire hotel due to the discovery of liquor on its premises is deemed unjust and illegal if the property owner is not implicated in the alleged offense. The court further said that the arbitrary assumption of the hotel owner's involvement in a liquor-related crime by excise authorities, solely based on the lease being unregistered, is unfounded. Consequently, the court nullified the confiscation order, deeming it unlawful.
Case Title: M/s. Vishwanath Iron Store vs. The Union of India
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 134
The Patna High Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by Vishwanath Iron Store, a partnership firm registered under the Bihar State Goods and Services Tax Act, seeking correction of a GST invoice for the purpose of availing input tax credit, while stating Understanding between parties cannot supersede the provisions of taxation laws.
Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy noted, “In the present case, the petitioner is a dealer registered under the BGST Act and the sale was effected from the State of Jharkhand. However, there is absolutely nothing to prove the movement of goods to the State of Bihar. The mere statement of the Railways that the invoice issued should be deemed to have been issued under the IGST Act, cannot enable the petitioner to seek input tax credit. The transaction between the Railways and the petitioner would not regulate the tax liability and in any event, the tax levied and collected as CGST and SGST would have been credited to the respective head of account.”
Case Title: M/s Punit Kumar Choubey vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, and Others
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 135
The Patna High Court recently ruled on a writ petition challenging an assessment order and the rejection of an appeal based on the limitation ground. The Court stated that the petitioner by his own failure had not availed the appellate remedy and in that circumstance, there can be no invocation of the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India The Court clarified that when a specific period for delay condonation is provided, there can be no extension by the Appellate Authority or the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Case Title: Satyamanu Kumar Singh vs. The State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 136
The Patna High Court recently acquitted a rape accused, observing that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) cannot be the sole basis for conviction.
A Division Bench of Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh and Justice Gunnu Anupama Chakravarthy observed, “Though, accused is capable of doing sexual act, that itself cannot prove the guilt for the charged offences. In the absence of the substantive oral evidence corroborated with medical evidence, it can be construed that the appellant shall presumed to be innocent of the charged offences.”
Case Title: Sanjeev Kumar vs. The State Of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 137
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court while dismissing the appeal filed by a man convicted of raping his minor daughter, observed that prosecution case cannot be completely discarded merely because the investigation was perfunctory when there is clear and cogent evidence of the victim herself.
The Division Bench comprising of Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Alok Kumar Pandey observed, “We further find that there was no purpose of his seizing the clothes of the appellant, when it was no sent for forensic examination ever. Perhaps, the Investigator did not consider any one of these to be important while investigating such a serious charge. But as is well settled, merely because an investigation is perfunctory, that is no ground to completely discard the prosecution case, specially in view of the clear and cogent evidence of the victim herself.”
Case Title: Ravi Kant vs. Bandana Kumari
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 138
In a significant judgement, the Patna High Court has ruled that the mere application of sindoor (vermilion) on a woman's forehead under coercion does not constitute a valid marriage under Hindu law. The Court emphasized that a Hindu marriage must be consensual and involve the customary 'saptapadi,' where the bride and groom complete seven rounds around a sacred fire for the union to be deemed binding.
The division bench, comprising Justices P B Bajanthri and Arun Kumar Jha, observed, "From bare perusal of the aforesaid provision, it is obvious that when such rites and ceremonies including Saptapadi the marriage becomes complete and binding, when seventh step is taken. Conversely, if 'saptapadi' has not been completed, the marriage would not be considered to be complete and binding."
Case Title: Sanjay Kumar Male vs. The State of Bihar and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 139
Expressing concern over the prolonged delay in recovering a college girl who was allegedly abducted nearly 11 months ago, the Patna High Court has taken a stern stance against the Muzaffarpur police. The court has directed the district police to form a special investigating team (SIT) immediately and collaborate with the state's Economic Offence Unit (EOU) to expedite the investigation. In addition, the Muzaffarpur Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) has been instructed to provide weekly progress reports on the investigation, with the court closely monitoring the case.
Case Title: Musmat Shanti Devi & Anr vs. Lallu and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 140
The Patna High Court recently ruled that an unregistered sale agreement remains admissible as evidence in a lawsuit seeking specific performance of the agreement.
Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra observed, “It is clear from the above that even where the sale agreement is not registered, the document can be received as evidence for considering the relief of specific performance and the inadmissibility will confine itself only to the protection sought for under Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act.”
Candidates With B.Ed. Not Eligible For Primary School Teaching Jobs: Patna High Court
Case Title: Lalan Kumar Yadav & Ors vs The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 141
The Patna High Court, while allowing a set of writ petitions challenging a 2018 notification by the National Council of Teacher Education (NCTE), has ruled that candidates holding Bachelor of Education (B. Ed.) qualifications cannot be deemed eligible for appointment as primary school teachers.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy observed, “The writ petitions are allowed with the finding that the notification dated 28.06.2018, issued by 'the NCTE' is no longer applicable and the B.Ed candidates cannot be considered eligible for appointment as primary school teachers.”
Case Title: Jalaluddin Khan @ Md. Jalaluddin vs The Union of Indias
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 142
The Patna High Court has held that offering legal assistance to banned organizations (such as Popular Front of India cadre) or interviewing candidates for selecting them for giving scholarships would never fall in any one of the proscribed categories of the Terrorist Acts under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
Furthermore, the court emphasized that mere membership in a banned organization should not be sufficient grounds for denying bail, especially when the trial is anticipated to extend over an extended period.
Case Title: Jalaluddin Khan @ Md. Jalaluddin vs The Union of Indias
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 142
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court has said that mere membership in a banned organization shouldn't be reason enough to deny bail, particularly when the trial is anticipated to be prolonged.
The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Alok Kumar Pandey said, “Merely being a member of a banned organization, would not justify rejection of bail when the Trial is likely to continue for a longer time.”
Case Title: Mahavir Sharmik and Nirman Swalambi Sahkari Samiti Limited vs State of Bihar & Ors.
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 143
In a recent legal development, the Patna High Court has ruled in favor of a Cooperative Society registered under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (BGST Act), stating that the Solid Waste Management Activity undertaken by the petitioner is exempt from BGST. The court quashed assessment orders and demand notices against the Cooperative Society, emphasizing that there is no supply of goods involved in the solid waste management disposal work awarded to the petitioner.
A division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy opined, “There is no supply of goods in the solid waste management disposal work awarded to the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the activity of the petitioner regulated by the work order produced as Annexure-5 and the consideration received for the same would be exempt from the BGST Act.”
Case Title: Md. Tazuddin vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 144
The Patna High Court has observed that any order or judgment issued by a Court or Tribunal, even if done ex parte, can be subjected to the writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.
Referring to the Supreme Court's 2020 decision in the case of N. Mohan Vs. R. Madhu, Justice Harish Kumar observed, “The analogy, which is deducible from the judgments referred hereinabove, this Court is of the opinion that any order/judgment passed by a Court or Tribunal even if it is ex parte is amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and such power cannot be scuttled nor any embargo be fixed thereupon, on the plea of remedy provided under Order IX Rule 13 of the C.P.C.”
Case Title: Avinash Kumar Ranjan vs The State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 145
The Patna High Court has observed that the Investigating Officer must ascertain the age of the victim in cases falling under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The court added that relying solely on medical opinion and self-assessment is not a reliable method for determining a person's age.
The division bench comprising Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Nani Tagia observed, “Be that as it may, with such confusion over the age of the victim, it was the solemn duty of the Investigating Officer to inquire about her age from the school in which she had been studying. It appears from the records of the case that no such effort was made with respect to ascertaining the age of the victim for confirming that she was less than 18 years of age, when she entered into a sexual relationship with the appellant.”
Case Title: Navjot Singh Sidhu vs The State of Bihar and Anr
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 146
The Patna High Court last week quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu for allegedly violating the restraining orders while appealing and cautioning Muslims against splitting their votes in his address before a public gathering during the 2019 Lok Sabha elections campaign.
Justice Sandeep Kumar opined, “In my considered opinion, the part of the speech on which the informant has relied upon to show that the petitioner was asking for votes on the ground of religion does not support the allegation. The petitioner has not made any statement which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity.”
Case Title: The State of Bihar vs. Amar Kumar
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 147
This week, the Patna High Court overturned the death penalty handed down to a man convicted of the murder and rape of a 12-year-old girl. The court reached this decision upon discovering that the prosecution's entire case relied solely on the presence of a sniffer dog entering the accused man's house.
The division bench of Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Alok Kumar Pandey observed, “We fail to understand as to how the Trial Court proceeded in the same manner as the investigation had proceeded, on the presumption that the dog would never have faulted in entering the house of the appellant. There is evidence of the dog having entered another person's house also. We, for the present, do not say that help of a snifer dog cannot be taken by the police.”
Case Title: M/s Trimurti Private Limited vs The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 148
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court, while adjudicating a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has granted relief to Trimurti Private Limited by issuing a conditional stay on the GST demand. The petitioner sought various reliefs, primarily aiming to avail the statutory remedy of appeal against an impugned order under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act (BGST Act).
Case Title: M/s Friends Mobile vs The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 149
In a notable decision, the Patna High Court has ruled that the Revenue Department lacks the authority to mandate the Appellant to make a complete pre-deposit when filing an appeal under the Amnesty Scheme using the Electronic Cash Ledger.
The central question addressed in the writ petition pertained to whether, upon initiating an appeal, ten percent of the outstanding amounts should be sourced from the Electronic Cash Ledger or the Electronic Credit Ledger.
M/s. Friends Mobile (“the Petitioner”) made a payment of ten percent from the Electronic Credit Ledger as required under the amnesty scheme introduced by the Revenue Department (“the Respondent”) for filing appeal.
Case Title: M/s Micro Zone vs The Union of India and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 152
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court overturned the dismissal of a GST appeal and reinstated the appeal, contingent upon meeting specified conditions outlined in Notification No. 53 of 2023-Central Tax.
Emphasizing the significance of adhering to statutory timelines while recognizing the opportunities provided by relevant notifications to revive dismissed appeals under specific conditions, the division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy stated, “In this context, noticing the Notification, we also make it clear that wherever we have rejected the writ petitions filed against orders; rejecting appeals for reason of delay being beyond that prescribed under Section 107(4) of the BGST Act; the assessee would be entitled to invoke the said remedy de hors the orders of this Court and avail of the benefit of Notification aforementioned, subject to the conditions therein being satisfied.”
Case Title: M/s Ceat Ltd. vs The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 150
Patna High Court has ruled that penalty is imposable under section 56(4)(b) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (Bihar VAT Act) on account of clerical mistake in mentioning of invoice number in SUVIDHA Form.
The above ruling came in a case filed by the petitioner, M/s Ceat Ltd. engaged in the manufacture and sale of tyres, tubes and flaps who was concerned with a penalty order passed under Section 60(4) (b) read with Section 56(4) (b) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 after detention of a truck carrying goods at the integrated check post, Dhobi, Gaya.
Case Title: M/s ACC Limited vs. The State of Bihar & Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 151
In affirming the directive of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, the Patna High Court ruled that the adjustment of entry tax paid on damaged cement is not permissible under the Bihar Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use, or Sale therein Act, 1993. The court reiterated and upheld the tribunal's decision, reinforcing that the provisions of the aforementioned act do not allow for the adjustment of entry tax in the case of damaged cement.
Case Title: Smt. Rudra Maya Sinh vs. The Registrar General and Ors
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 153
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court dismissed a petition filed by a 96-year-old widow, seeking a family pension for her late husband, a retired Judicial Officer, citing a gross delay of more than 30 years in the claim, coupled with a lack of substantiating material to establish her marital status and her husband's service history.
The division bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy observed, "The claim made now after more than 30 years is grossly delayed. The petitioner herein also does not have any substantiating material to indicate that she was married to the Judicial Officer."
Case Title: Alok Bharti vs. Jyoti Raj
LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 154
In a noteworthy judgment, the Patna High Court has declared that making baseless accusations of adultery, fornication, and coerced prostitution by a woman against her husband not only constitutes harassment and character assassination but also tarnishes the individual's public reputation in society.
The division bench of Justice P B Bajathri and Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya observed, “The leveling of false allegation by one spouse to the other having alleged illicit relations with different persons outside the wedlock amounted to mental cruelty. In the present case, respondent – wife alleged allegations before the employer of appellant and in the domestic violence allegations of soliciting prostitution by appellant and his mother and appellant involved in adultery and fornication etc. Respondent admitted those allegations are at the instigation of her advocate and they are not true.”
Patna High Court Allows Appeal Beyond Stipulated Time based on CBIC Notification
Case Title: M/s Prince Sanitation Gandhi Path vs. The State of Bihar and Ors LL Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Pat) 145
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court has provided relief to individuals facing delayed appeals under Sections 73 and 74 of the BGST Act.
The judgment, arising from a petition challenging the rejection of an appeal due to a five-day delay, underscores the significance of a recent notification by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.
According to Notification No. 53 of 2023-Central Tax, dated 02.11.2023 (S.O. 4767(E)), the time for filing appeals against orders passed by the Proper Officer on or before 31.03.2023 has been extended.