IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.540 of 2007 Vivek Kumar & Anr Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 3 13-7-2011 Heard learned counsel for the State. Nobody appears on behalf of petitioners. Earlier also this contempt application was dismissed for non-prosecution on 12-8-2009. After restoration the matter has been listed today . Today also nobody appears. Petitioners have a limited role in the contempt matter because the contempt is between the contemnor and the court which passed the order which is alleged to have been violated. In the present case the Criminal Writ Petition filed in the year 2004 was disposed of by directing the petitioners to approach the District authorities of Purnea with necessary copies of earlier order. The authorities were directed to ensure that crops grown by the land owners are not looted away by anti-social elements and protection is provided for harvesting by the land owners. Show cause filed on behalf of opposite parties, 2 particularly on behalf of opposite party nos.2 and 4 discloses that petitioners never approached the authorities in person and in December, 2005 the Circle Officer and Officer-in-Charge of the concerned area reported that no crops were standing over the land of khata no. 197 of Mauza Bhotia. It appears that in the year 2007 also protection was provided for harvesting the crops by one Birendra Kumar Yadav who claims to be representative of the petitiones. Annexure-B to the show cause discloses that a police case was instituted in the year 2006 by Birendra Kumar Yadav and thereafter a proceeding under section 107 Cr.P.C. was initiated on account of dispute relating to land in question between two groups. In the facts of the case, this Court is satisfied that the authorities have acted as per order of this Court contained in annexure-1. That order passed in a criminal writ petition cannot govern the law and order situation between different persons for all time. As and when there is threat to law and order, the authorities are expected to act in accordance with law, not on account of any order of this Court but on account of their duty to the public. 3 No useful purpose will be served by keeping this contempt application pending. It is disposed of accordingly. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)