1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Contempt Case (Civil) No. 38 of 2025 ---- Amit Kumar Pandey, aged about 44 years, son of Late Prabhunath Pandey, resident of Village- Janki Nagar, Post Office- Garkha, Police Station- Garkha, District- Chhapra, Bihar .......Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Mr. Govind Mohan, aged about NOT KNOWN, son of NOT KNOWN, Secretary, Ministry of Home Affair, Government of India, having its office at North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi, P.O:- Rajpath Area, P.S:- South Avenue, Dist:-Central Delhi. 3. Mr. Rajwinder Singh Bhatti, aged about NOT KNOWN, son of NOT KNOWN, Director General of C.I.S.F, having its office at Block No-13, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, P.O:- Lodhi Road, P.S:- Lodhi Colony, Dist:- New Delhi. 4. Mrs. Shanthi G Jaidev, aged about NOT KNOWN, daughter of NOT KNOWN, Inspector General of C.I.S.F, Eastern Sector Ranchi, having its office at Tiril, Post Office-Dhurwa, Police Station- Nagri, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. Mr. Madan Kishore Singh, aged about NOT KNOWN, son of NOT KNOWN, Deputy Inspector General of C.I.S.F, East Zone Head Quarter Patna, having its office at Boring Road, Post Office-Patliputra, Police Station- Patliputra, Dist:-Patna, Bihar. 6. Mr. Harendra Narayan, aged about NOT KNOWN, son of NOT KNOWN, Senior Commandant, C.I.S.F Unit 2nd Reserve Battalion, Ranchi, having its office at Post office-Dhurwa, Police Station-Nagri, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. .....Opposite Parties --- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kumar Dubey, Advocate For the O. P No.1 : Mr. R. K. Shahi, AC to SC (L&C)-I For the O.P Nos. 2 to 6 : Mr. Anil Kumar, ASGI Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, CGC --- 02/ Dated: 06.02.2025 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. We are of the opinion that proceedings for contempt of Court could not have been initiated on the grievances raised by the petitioner in the application filed in the contempt case and that the grievances of the petitioner have to be raised by him independently in a fresh writ petition. 2 3. Therefore, granting liberty to the petitioner to avail the said remedy, this contempt case is closed. (M. S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J) (Deepak Roshan, J.) Amit/Vedanti