{"id":215699,"date":"2011-08-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-08-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011"},"modified":"2018-10-27T16:56:15","modified_gmt":"2018-10-27T11:26:15","slug":"ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011","title":{"rendered":"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Patna High Court &#8211; Orders<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011<\/div>\n<pre>                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA\n                           Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12507 of 2011\n                ======================================================\n<\/pre>\n<p>                Ashutosh Kumar Roy, son of late Anand Mohan Roy, R\/o House No. 159\/F,<br \/>\n                Sri Krishna Puri, P.S. &#8211; Sri Krishna Puri, P.O. &#8211; G.P.O., District &#8211; Patna<br \/>\n                (Bihar)<br \/>\n                                                                    &#8230;. &#8230;. Petitioner<br \/>\n                                               Versus\n<\/p>\n<p>                1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Old<br \/>\n                   Secretariat, Patna,\n<\/p>\n<p>                2. The Principal Secretary, Department of General Administration, Govt.<br \/>\n                   of Bihar, Patna, earlier known as Department of Personnel &amp;<br \/>\n                   Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna,\n<\/p>\n<p>                3. The Bihar Public Service Commission through its Chairman,\n<\/p>\n<p>                4. The Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, Bailey Road, Patna,\n<\/p>\n<p>                5. The High Court of Judicature at Patna in its Administrative Side through<br \/>\n                   the Registrar General, Patna High Court, Patna<br \/>\n                                                             &#8230;. &#8230;. Respondent\/s<br \/>\n                ======================================================<br \/>\n                Appearance :\n<\/p>\n<p>                For the Petitioner\/s : Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Roy (In person).\n<\/p>\n<p>                For the State            :   Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, GP 3 and<br \/>\n                                             Mr. Deepak Kumar, AC to GP 3.\n<\/p>\n<p>                For the BPSC             :   Mr. Sanjay Pandey, Advocate.\n<\/p>\n<p>                For the High Court : Mr. Lalit Kishore, AAG 1.\n<\/p>\n<p>                ======================================================<br \/>\n                CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE<br \/>\n                       and<br \/>\n                       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA<\/p>\n<p>                CAV ORDER<\/p>\n<p>                (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)<\/p>\n<p>3. 18-08-2011                   This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is<br \/>\n                filed by one Ashutosh Kumar Roy, an Advocate by profession.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                The matter at dispute is the selection of Munsifs<br \/>\n                pursuant to the 24th Bihar Judicial Service Competitive<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> 2   Patna High Court CWJC No.12507 of 2011 (3) dt.18-08-2011<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         2\/6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>            Examination conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission<br \/>\n            (hereinafter referred to as &#8220;the Commission&#8221;). Pursuant to the<br \/>\n            advertisement published on 3rd September 1990; after competitive<br \/>\n            examination and the interview a merit list was prepared and<br \/>\n            appointments were made in 1994.\n<\/p>\n<p>                             The grievance of the petitioner is peculiar. The<br \/>\n            petitioner claims that as on 31st December 1994, 327 vacancies in<br \/>\n            the cadre of Munsif were available; the Commission was,<br \/>\n            therefore, obliged to prepare a select list of 327 candidates and to<br \/>\n            recommend 327 candidates for appointment as Munsif. The<br \/>\n            second prong of the grievance is in respect of abolition of 50 posts<br \/>\n            of Munsif to create 40 posts of Sub Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>                             Under the aforesaid advertisement published on 3 rd<br \/>\n            September 1990, the Commission invited applications from<br \/>\n            eligible candidates for the 24th Bihar Judicial Service Competitive<br \/>\n            Examination for 7 vacancies. The advertisement specifically<br \/>\n            mentioned that there may be alteration in the vacancy position.<br \/>\n            After holding competitive examination, a notice was published on<br \/>\n            7th October 1991 indicating that the recruitment would be made for<br \/>\n            245 existing vacancies. The notice also indicated the extent of<br \/>\n            reservation for         various      categories.   Pursuant to the   said<br \/>\n            advertisement, the examination was conducted, interview was<br \/>\n            held, select list was prepared and appointments were made.<br \/>\n            Evidently, the petitioner was not selected for appointment as<br \/>\n            Munsif.\n<\/p>\n<p>                              Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed CWJC No.<br \/>\n            2193 of 1995 under Article 226 of the Constitution. The said<br \/>\n            petition was dismissed on 19th May 1995 on the ground that the<br \/>\n            petition raised disputed questions of fact. One more writ petition,<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> 3   Patna High Court CWJC No.12507 of 2011 (3) dt.18-08-2011<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         3\/6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>            being CWJC No. 5511 of 1994, was filed by one Rajesh Kumar<br \/>\n            Jha &amp; others in the same subject matter. The present petitioner also<br \/>\n            joined in the said writ petition. The said writ petition came to be<br \/>\n            dismissed by this Court (Coram:                    Shiva Kirti Singh, J and<br \/>\n            Chandra Mohan Prasad, J) on 6th February 2006. The challenge to<br \/>\n            the said judgment before the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court failed. The<br \/>\n            petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 15184 of 2006<br \/>\n            was dismissed in limine.\n<\/p>\n<p>                             Now, after five years the petitioner has raked up the<br \/>\n            same issue again to challenge the filling up of 245 vacancies<br \/>\n            against 327 vacancies available as on 31st December 1994 and the<br \/>\n            abolition of 50 posts of Munsif.\n<\/p>\n<p>                             The petitioner Ashutosh Kumar Roy has appeared in<br \/>\n            person. He has submitted that the advertisement published by the<br \/>\n            Commission categorically specified that the vacancy position may<br \/>\n            change. As the merit list was prepared in 1994, the vacancy as on<br \/>\n            31st December 1994 ought to have been filled up by operating the<br \/>\n            merit list of the 24th Bihar Judicial Service Competitive<br \/>\n            Examination. He has also submitted that pursuant to the 23rd Bihar<br \/>\n            Judicial Service Competitive Examination, the vacancies as on the<br \/>\n            last date of the interview were filled up on the basis of the result of<br \/>\n            the said examination; the same treatment ought to have been given<br \/>\n            in respect of the 24th Bihar Judicial Service Competitive<br \/>\n            Examination. He has also challenged the action of the State<br \/>\n            Government in abolishing 50 posts of Munsif. He has submitted<br \/>\n            that all along no Court has considered the petitioner&#8217;s grievance in<br \/>\n            respect of the abolition of 50 posts of Munsif.\n<\/p>\n<p>                             In support of his submission, the petitioner has relied<br \/>\n            upon the judgments of the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in the matter of<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> 4   Patna High Court CWJC No.12507 of 2011 (3) dt.18-08-2011<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         4\/6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>            Sandeep Singh Vs. State of Haryana &amp; Anr. [(2002) 10 SCC<br \/>\n            549] and of this Court in the matters of Jyoti Kumar Tripathi Vs.<br \/>\n            State of Bihar &amp; Or. [1995 (1) PLJR 483] and of Ashok Kumar &amp;<br \/>\n            Anr. Vs. The State of Bihar &amp; Ors. [2010 (1) PLJR 734].\n<\/p>\n<p>                             The petition is contested by the respondents. Learned<br \/>\n            Additional Advocate General Mr. Lalit Kishore has appeared for<br \/>\n            the High Court. He has submitted that the petition is barred by<br \/>\n            principle of res judicata. The very issues agitated in the present<br \/>\n            petition were agitated in the earlier writ petitions, CWJC No. 5511<br \/>\n            of 1994 &amp; CWJC No. 2193 of 1995. In the present petition the<br \/>\n            petitioner has raised a stale claim and that since 24th Bihar Judicial<br \/>\n            Service Competitive Examination the Commission has conducted<br \/>\n            25th &amp; 26th Bihar Judicial Service Competitive Examinations. The<br \/>\n            27th and 28th Bihar Judicial Service Competitive Examinations are<br \/>\n            in the offing. Therefore also, the present petition needs to be<br \/>\n            dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>                              In the matter of Sandeep Singh (Supra), a similar<br \/>\n            issue was raised in respect of recruitment for Haryana Civil<br \/>\n            Services (Executive Branch). The advertisement in question<br \/>\n            indicated the number of vacancies with stipulation that the<br \/>\n            vacancy position may change. The Hon&#8217;ble Court held, &#8220;The<br \/>\n            vacancies available in any particular service till the date of<br \/>\n            interview at least should be filled up from the very same<br \/>\n            examination unless there is any statutory embargo for the<br \/>\n            same.&#8221; It may be noted that in the present case also the<br \/>\n            advertisement did stipulate that the vacancy position may change.<br \/>\n            Accordingly, by a subsequent notice published on 7 th October<br \/>\n            1991 the precise vacancy position (245 vacancies) was notified.<br \/>\n            Hence, in our view, there was no scope for alteration thereafter.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\"> 5   Patna High Court CWJC No.12507 of 2011 (3) dt.18-08-2011<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         5\/6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                             The matter of Jyoti Kumar Tripathi (Supra) arose<br \/>\n            from the proceeding filed under the Contempt of Courts Act. The<br \/>\n            Court held that as directed by the order made on the writ petition,<br \/>\n            the Bihar Public Service Commission was required to send as<br \/>\n            many names as the number of vacancies available as on the date of<br \/>\n            the interview.\n<\/p>\n<p>                             In the matter of Ashok Kumar (Supra), the question<br \/>\n            was that of effect of change in the reservation policy made with<br \/>\n            retrospective effect upon the recruitment process already<br \/>\n            completed. The matter before us does not relate to the question of<br \/>\n            reservation or amendment to the substantive or procedural rule<br \/>\n            pending the recruitment process. This judgment, therefore, has no<br \/>\n            applicability to the facts of the present case.\n<\/p>\n<p>                             We do agree with the learned Additional Advocate<br \/>\n            General Mr. Lalit Kishore that the present petition is barred by the<br \/>\n            principle of res judicata and that the petition raises a stale claim.\n<\/p>\n<p>                             Nevertheless, we do note that the advertisement<br \/>\n            published by the Commission on 3rd September 1990 reserved the<br \/>\n            liberty to the Commission to alter the number of vacancies. In<br \/>\n            exercise of the said liberty the Commission published the notice<br \/>\n            dated 7th October 1991 to notify that the recruitment would be<br \/>\n            made for 245 existing vacancies. Thereafter, the Commission had<br \/>\n            no power or authority to alter the vacancy position. The said<br \/>\n            advertisement did not confer a right upon an applicant to assert<br \/>\n            how many vacancies shall be filled up pursuant to the said<br \/>\n            recruitment process. Besides, it is settled law that the number of<br \/>\n            vacancies advertised only can be filled up pursuant to a particular<br \/>\n            recruitment process. The vacancy arising after the date of the<br \/>\n            advertisement cannot be filled in by the same recruitment process<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> 6         Patna High Court CWJC No.12507 of 2011 (3) dt.18-08-2011<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                               6\/6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                  unless the intention to do so is mentioned in the advertisement<br \/>\n                  expressly or by necessary implication. The claim of the writ<br \/>\n                  petitioner that as the interviews were held in 1994, all vacancies<br \/>\n                  existing as on 31st December 1994 shall be filled in by the same<br \/>\n                  recruitment process is contrary to the settled law and is totally<br \/>\n                  misconceived.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                   Challenge to the abolition of 50 posts of Munsif is<br \/>\n                  based on a wrong notion that the petitioner has a right to interfere<br \/>\n                  in the matter. We must note that the abolition or creation of posts<br \/>\n                  is the exclusive prerogative of the State Government. In the<br \/>\n                  present case, it appears that the State Government had abolished<br \/>\n                  50 posts of Munsif and as against it created 40 posts of Sub Judge.<br \/>\n                  Obviously, this must have been done keeping in view the<br \/>\n                  requirement of the number of Judicial Officers at various levels of<br \/>\n                  the State Judiciary. The petitioner has no locus standi to challenge<br \/>\n                  the abolition or creation of posts in the State Judicial Service. The<br \/>\n                  challenge is devoid of merits.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                   For the aforesaid reasons, the petition is dismissed in<br \/>\n                  limine.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                  Having regard to the history of litigation, we are of<br \/>\n                  the opinion that the repeated attempt of the petitioner to rake up<br \/>\n                  imaginary grievances amounts to abuse of process of law. The<br \/>\n                  petitioner is, therefore, required to be visited with exemplary cost.<br \/>\n                  However, the petitioner being a member of the legal fraternity we<br \/>\n                  do not impose cost upon him.<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n                                                                     (R.M. Doshit, CJ)\n\n\n    NAFR                                                   (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)\n     Dilip.\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Patna High Court &#8211; Orders Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12507 of 2011 ====================================================== Ashutosh Kumar Roy, son of late Anand Mohan Roy, R\/o House No. 159\/F, Sri Krishna Puri, P.S. &#8211; Sri Krishna [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-215699","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court-orders"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-27T11:26:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-27T11:26:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1604,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Patna High Court - Orders\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011\",\"name\":\"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-27T11:26:15+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-27T11:26:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011","datePublished":"2011-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-27T11:26:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011"},"wordCount":1604,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Patna High Court - Orders"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011","name":"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-27T11:26:15+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashtutosh-kumar-roy-vs-the-state-of-bihar-ors-on-18-august-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ashtutosh Kumar Roy vs The State Of Bihar &amp; Ors on 18 August, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/215699","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=215699"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/215699\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=215699"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=215699"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=215699"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}