Jharkhand High Court
Cont.(Cvl)/196/2026 of MOTI RAM Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 21 April 2026
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Cvl.) No. 196 of 2026 --------- Moti Ram (age about 43 years) s/o Late Arjun Ram resident of Bompss Town, Near Kalibadi, P.O. & P.S. – Deoghar, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand). … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of
[2026:JHHC:11539-DB]
Page | 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cont. Case (Cvl.) No. 196 of 2026
---------
Moti Ram (age about 43 years) s/o Late Arjun Ram resident of Bompss Town, Near Kalibadi, P.O. & P.S. – Deoghar, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand).
… … Petitioner
Versus
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. Sri Naman Priyesh Lakra, the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S.-Deoghar, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand).
3. Sri Zeeshan Qamar, the Managing Director, Jharkhand State Agriculture Marketing Committee, Ranchi, P.O. – G.P.O. Ranchi, P.S.-Kotwali, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand).
4. Sri Ravi Kumar, the Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Chairman, Agriculture Marketing Committee, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar, District-Deoghar (Jharkhand).
… … Opp. Parties
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Arbind Kumar, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Suman Marandi, AC to SC-IV --------- 04/Dated: 21st April, 2026
1. The present contempt case is against the alleged, willful and deliberate non-compliance of the order dated 17.06.2025 passed by this Court in L.P.A. No. 176 of 2023.
2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by this Court, subject matter of the present contempt case, has been declined to be interfered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by dismissal of the S.L.P. being Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 1268 of 2026 vide order dated 27.01.2026.
3. Learned counsel for the concerned opp. party has submitted by referring to paragraph-7 of the show cause that the service of the petitioner has been regularized vide order dated 26.03.2026 vide memo no.317.
4. This Court considering the fact that the order having been compiled with, there is no need to proceed further.
[2026:JHHC:11539-DB]
Page | 2
5. Accordingly, the present contempt case stands disposed of.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Sanjay Prasad, J.) 21st April, 2026 Saurabh/-