State Of Bihar & Ors vs Ashok Kumar Singh & Ors

2. The factual matrix of the case is as follows:

3. The 1st respondent at that stage filed a writ petition bearing CWJC No.7680 of 1997 in the Patna High Court challenging the inquiry. The same was disposed of with certain observations. The observation made by the High Court having not complied with, a contempt petition bearing M.J.C.No.1498/1998 was filed by the 1st respondent in the Patna High Court. It was disposed of with a peremptory order to dispose of the inquiry within 8 months, subject to grant of extension.

4. Meanwhile, the unified State of Bihar was bifurcated into the State of Bihar and the State of Jharkhand through the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the “Reorganisation Act”). 15th November, 2000 was fixed to be the appointed day for such bifurcation. The 1st respondent was allotted/transferred to Jharkhand Cadre. In absence of any progress in the Vigilance inquiry, the 1st respondent filed writ petition bearing CWJC No.1573/2001 before the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi. He sought an order to restrain the State of Bihar from proceeding with the inquiry against him and from taking any coercive action against him. He also sought to quash the notice dated 7th April, 2001 issued by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance (Investigation) asking him to appear on 24th April, 2001 in the inquiry.

5. The High Court of Jharkhand by order dated 20th April, 2001 refused to interfere with the inquiry and dismissed the writ petition. The Letters Patent Appeal filed by the 1st respondent against the order dated 20th April, 2001 was also dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Jharkhand by order dated 27th September, 2001.

7. The 1st respondent challenged the aforesaid FIR dated 20th August, 2002 by filing a writ petition bearing Cr.W.J.C. No.352 of 2002 before the Patna High Court with a prayer to quash the FIR. Further prayer was made to direct the Vigilance Department, Government of Bihar not to investigate or to proceed against him. The Vigilance Department filed its counter affidavit thereto.

22. The 1st respondent challenged the vigilance inquiry in the earlier writ petition bearing Cr. W.J.C. No.7680/1997 in the Patna High Court. That was disposed of on 25th November, 1997. There was no occasion for the 1st respondent to challenge the said vigilance inquiry by filing another writ petition.

29. The 1st respondent had challenged the inquiry before the Patna High Court by filing a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No.7680 of 1997. The said case was disposed of with certain observations. Having not complied with, a contempt petition bearing M.J.C.No.1498 of 1998 was filed by the 1st respondent in the Patna High Court. It was also disposed of on 29th November, 1999 with a peremptory order to dispose of the inquiry within 8 months, subject to grant of extension. Order dated 29th November, 1999 is quoted hereunder:

30. Admittedly, vigilance inquiry against the 1st respondent was not completed within 8 months as directed by the High Court. Having not completed the inquiry within the stipulated time, as per order of the High Court, the said proceedings stood quashed on the ground of non-compliance of Court’s order.

32. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.