IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3431 of 2009 KAMLESHWARI PODDAR son of late Narsingh Poddar, Resident of Udakishunganj, P.S. Udakishunganj, District- Madhepura. . . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Dr. Birendra Kumar Yadav, the Collector, Madhepura District, Madhepura. 3. Sri Anil Kumar Mahto, the Block Supply Officer, Udakishunganj, District- Madhepura. . . . . Opposite Parties. ----------- 13/ 28.01.2011 The instant Contempt application has been filed for initiating Contempt proceeding against opposite parties, particularly opposite party no.2, for willful disobedience of order dated 18.12.2008 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No. 797 of 2008. This Court by order dated 18.12.2008 observed that if the petitioner files an application before the Collector, Madhepura, he will release the rice in his favour seized in Udakishanganj P.S. case no. 74 of 2008 after taking appropriate security without much delay, 25 % of security will be in form of cash security. This Court noticed the submission of the petitioner that the rice kept in a sealed godown at Madhepura can be affected 2 by flood and also taking all these aspects into consideration, this Court directed for release of rice in question without any delay. The petitioner filed the instant Contempt application on 06.11.2009 raising a grievance that though his application was received in the office of Collector on 14.02.2009 followed by a reminder but still latter did not release the rice in question. A show–cause has been filed on behalf of opposite party no.3, in which copy of order of the Collector, Madhepura, as contained in Memo no. 204 dated 29.01.2010, has been annexed showing release of the rice in question on taking security. The Collector in his order stated that the seized rice was kept in the premises/godown of the petitioner and he never gave any information that the rice in question may get contaminated on account of entering of flood water. In paragraph 6 of the show-cause it has been stated that 314 bags of rice was handed over to the petitioner, out of which 14 bags were found in good condition. 3 It would appear from the materials on record that the rice was released belatedly. It would also appear from the show-cause that majority of the bags have not been returned in good condition, though in order- sheet of this Court the apprehension of the petitioner that flood water may enter in the godown premises and may damage the seized grains. This contempt application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file separate application if advised before the appropriate forum for compensation, etc. Uday/ (S.P. Singh, J.)