Sunita Kumari vs The State of Bihar — MJC/818/2022

Case under Constitution of India Section 215. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: BRHC010368502022

e-Filing Number

11-05-2022

Filing Number

MJC/8759/2022

Filing Date

11-May-2022

Registration No

MJC/818/2022

Registration Date

13-May-2022

Judge

Mr. Justice Shailendra Singh

Coram

Mr. Justice Shailendra Singh

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

MJC ( 10 )

Sub-Category

CONTEMPT- SJ ( 100 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 215
Contempt of Courts Act Section 15

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sunita Kumari

    Adv. Bijay Shankar Choubey

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Bihar

  2. 2.Sri Prem Singh Meena,

  3. 3.Sri Aalok Kumar,

  4. 4.Aman Sameer,

  5. 5.Smt. Tarani Kumari,

  6. 6.Smt. Sweta, the Child development Project Officer,

  7. 7.Mr. Prabhat Ranjan,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Shailendra SinghView PDF

    The Patna High Court disposed of Sunita Kumari's contempt petition (MJC 818/2022) after the State submitted that a prior order dated 18.02.2022 had been fully complied with, as evidenced by statements in the show cause filed by the Child Development Project Officer. The court found no grounds to proceed further but clarified that the petitioner retains all legal rights to pursue her grievance in an appropriate forum if any issues remain unresolved. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-Sep-2022

    Miscellaneous

    The Joint Registrar Judicial Lawazima

  4. 11-May-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. MJC/818/2022

casestatus.in Summary

The Patna High Court disposed of Sunita Kumari's contempt petition (MJC 818/2022) after the State submitted that a prior order dated 18.02.2022 had been fully complied with, as evidenced by statements in the show cause filed by the Child Development Project Officer. The court found no grounds to proceed further but clarified that the petitioner retains all legal rights to pursue her grievance in an appropriate forum if any issues remain unresolved. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case