KHIRU RAI vs STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - AMIT KUMAR — Cont.(Cvl)/1159/2025
Disposed: Contested--Dropped on 08th May 2026.
CNR: JHHC010218582025
Filing Number
Cont.(Cvl)/7022/2025
Filing Date
02-Jul-2025
Registration No
Cont.(Cvl)/1159/2025
Registration Date
15-Sep-2025
Judge
Sri Ananda Sen, J.
Coram
Sri Ananda Sen, J.
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CONTEMPT ( 118 )
Sub-Category
Contempt of Courts Act 1971 ( 1 )
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Decision Date
08-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dropped
Last updated 04-Jun-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.KHIRU RAI
Adv. VISHAL KUMAR RAI
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - AMIT KUMAR
-
2.SRI ANURAG GUPTA, THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, JHARKHAND
-
3.SRI PRABHAT KUMAR, THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, JHARKHAND ARMED POLICE
-
4.SRI S. KARTIK, THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, JHARKHAND ARMED POLICE
-
5.SRI KISHORE KAUSHAL, THE COMMANDANT, JHARKHAND ARMED POLICE, HAZARIBAGH
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-May-2026
Sri Ananda Sen, J.View PDF
Case Summary: Khiru Rai v. State of Jharkhand The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed the contempt petition filed by Khiru Rai against non-compliance with a prior order dated 28.04.2025. The State confirmed that the ordered amount had been disbursed to the petitioner. Although the petitioner's counsel raised concerns about potential discrepancies in the quantum paid, the court dropped the contempt proceedings while preserving the petitioner's right to challenge any quantum discrepancy before the appropriate forum. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
05-Dec-2025
Sri Ananda Sen, J.View PDF
-
19-Sep-2025
Sri Ananda Sen, J.View PDF
-
19-Sep-2025
Fresh Filing (Admission)
Sri Ananda Sen, J.
-
06-Aug-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Jul-2025
Case filed
Registration No. Cont.(Cvl)/1159/2025
Case Summary: Khiru Rai v. State of Jharkhand The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed the contempt petition filed by Khiru Rai against non-compliance with a prior order dated 28.04.2025. The State confirmed that the ordered amount had been disbursed to the petitioner. Although the petitioner's counsel raised concerns about potential discrepancies in the quantum paid, the court dropped the contempt proceedings while preserving the petitioner's right to challenge any quantum discrepancy before the appropriate forum. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts