Jaynarayan Sah vs Pankaj Kumar, principal secretary, food and consumer protection department and others — MJC/178/2019

Case under Constitution of India Section 215. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: BRHC010048882019

Filing Number

MJC/4839/2019

Filing Date

15-Jan-2019

Registration No

MJC/178/2019

Registration Date

15-Jan-2019

Judge

Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy

Coram

Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

MJC ( 10 )

Sub-Category

CONTEMPT- SJ ( 100 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 215

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Jaynarayan Sah

    Adv. Rajeev Kumar Labh,Chandra Moleshwar,Chandra Moleshwar, ,Chandra Moleshwar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Pankaj Kumar, principal secretary, food and consumer protection department and others

  2. 2.Smt. Shailja Sharma,

  3. 3.Sri Shambhunath Jha,

  4. 4.Md. Barktullah,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Rajiv RoyView PDF

    The Patna High Court disposed of Jaynarayan Sah's contempt petition seeking action against government officials for willful disobedience of a February 19, 2018 order from CWJC No. 13273 of 2017. The court found the petition infructuous after the petitioner's counsel informed that the disputed order had been fully complied with by the respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Aug-2019

    For Admission - Tied Up

    Mr. Justice Vikash Jain

  4. 07-Aug-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 15-Jan-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. MJC/178/2019

casestatus.in Summary

The Patna High Court disposed of Jaynarayan Sah's contempt petition seeking action against government officials for willful disobedience of a February 19, 2018 order from CWJC No. 13273 of 2017. The court found the petition infructuous after the petitioner's counsel informed that the disputed order had been fully complied with by the respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case