Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3058

PATNA HIGH COURT
Jitendra Kumar, J
Gaurav Jalan – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2002 of 2018 | Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1983 of 2018 | Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2003 of 2018 | CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 29160 of 2022

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Rajeev Shekhar
For the Respondents: Md. Nadim Seraj, GP-5
Mr. Manish Kumar, GP-4
Mr. Sanjeet Kumar
Mr. Uday Pratap Singh

The court emphasizes the importance of procedural compliance while balancing justice, allowing a final opportunity to rectify defects in filings with a financial penalty.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The judgment references procedural obligations under the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the rectification of defects in legal petitions. Facts of the Case: The case involves Gaurav Jalan, who, after being granted opportunities to remedy procedural defects in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29160 of 2022, failed to comply with the court's orders.

Findings of Court:
The court determines that the lack of compliance is unacceptable; nonetheless, it grants the petitioner additional time for compliance but imposes a cost.

Issues: The primary issue includes whether the petitioner can be allowed further time to rectify defects in the petition despite prior non-compliance.

Ratio Decidendi: The court articulates that justice must be balanced with adherence to procedural rules and also sanctions financial compensation for legal aid while allowing one final opportunity for compliance.

Result: The petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 29160 of 2022 is granted one week’s time to remove the defect(s) as pointed out by the office subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to Patna High Court Legal Services Committee.

Table of Content
1. court's decision on procedural compliance. (Para 2)
2. final opportunity granted with cost imposed. (Para 3)

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

7 19-01-2026 As per the last order, the petitioner was required in Cr. Misc. No. 29160 of 2022 for removing the defect(s) as pointed out by the office, but despite opportunity granted to the petitioner to do the needful, he has preferred not to comply with the order and he is further seeking one week’s time to do the needful.

2. On account of such delay in removing the defect(s)

as pointed out by the office in Cr. Misc. 29160 of 2022, three other connected writ petitions are held up and the Court is unable to proceed in the writ petitions. Hence, such delay is not acceptable.

3. However, in the interest of justice, the petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 29160 of 2022 is granted one week’s time to remove the defect(s) as pointed out by the office subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to Patna High Court Legal Services Committee, under the head “Legal Aid”.

4. List this case on 02.02.2026.

(Jitendra Kumar, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3058

PATNA HIGH COURTJitendra Kumar, JGaurav Jalan – AppellantVersusThe State of Bihar – RespondentCriminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2002 of 2018 | Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1983 of 2018 | Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2003 of 2018 | CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 29160 of 2022

The court emphasizes the importance of procedural compliance while balancing justice, allowing a final opportunity to rectify defects in filings with a financial penalty.

PATNA HIGH COURT
Jitendra Kumar, J
Gaurav Jalan – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2002 of 2018 | Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1983 of 2018 | Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2003 of 2018 | CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 29160 of 2022