Patna High Court warns officials over ‘tendency to undermine judicial process’

By Alok Mohit

Patna: The Patna High Court has expressed frustration over the tendency of powerful figures to undermine the judicial process, stating that “such behaviour cannot be tolerated in a democratic society”.

While hearing a contempt of court petition related to a sand mining contract dispute between Prakash Iron and the Bihar government, the bench of Justice Purnendu Singh underscored its commitment to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law, warning of potential consequences for the officials involved.

In its petition, Prakash Iron claimed that the authorities concerned failed to honour a previous court order directing them to assess the petitioner’s claims regarding a sand mining contract. Specifically, the court had instructed the respondent authorities to review the petitioner’s representation concerning the return of a proportionate amount for the remaining contract period, following an inquiry that found mining had occurred for only a limited time.

During the hearing on September 20, petitioner’s counsel Mohammad Fazle Karim and Gyan Prakash Ojha, representing the state, were present in court. The court was informed that following its previous order in April 2024, the Aurangabad district magistrate had formed a three-member inquiry committee to assess the situation. The committee, comprising the Daudnagar sub-divisional officer, sub-divisional police officer, and the assistant director of mines, Aurangabad (as a representative of Bihar State Mining Corporation Limited), determined that Prakash Iron had engaged in mining at the Tejpura-18A sand ghat only for a short duration, thus paving the way for a refund of the remaining contract amount.

However, the case took a contentious turn when it was revealed that the assistant director of mines, Aurangabad, appealed against the collector’s order, which favoured the petitioner. The court was informed that the appeal was still pending before the mines commissioner, raising questions about compliance with the court’s previous orders.

In his order, Justice Singh criticised the actions of the officials involved, highlighting alleged manipulations by the Bihar State Mining Corporation Limited (BSMCL) managing director, who reportedly pressured the assistant director to contest the earlier ruling. The court deemed this conduct contemptuous, emphasising the serious implications of exploiting subordinate positions to obstruct justice.

Coming down heavily on the erring officials, the court remarked: “This is one example where a person exploits the distress situation of his subordinate to force him to perform in an illegal manner, resulting in wickedness by riding roughshod over the weak. Should the Court sit back and watch supinely while the strong trample underfoot the rights of the weak?”

The case has been re-notified for hearing on September 27, 2024, with a stern warning from the court regarding actions to be taken should the involved parties fail to comply with previous directives.