IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2540 of 2024 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15202 of 2018 ======================================================

Surendra Prasad Son of Late Motilal Prasad, Resident of House No. 405, Ward No. 12, English Kabristan, Hanumangadhi, Motihari, Police Station-

Town, District- East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar Bihar

2. Dr. D.K. Shukla, The Chairman, Bihar State Pollution Board, Patna.

3. Sri S. Chandra Shekhar, The Secretary, Bihar State Pollution Board, Patna.

4. Sri Gopal Meena, The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.

5. Sri Saurabh Jorwal, The District Magistrate-Cum- Collector, East Champaran, Motihari.

6. Sri Kantesh Kumar Mishra, The Superintendent of Police, East Champaran, Motihari.

7. Sri Shrestha Anupam, Sub- Divisional Officer, Sadar, Motihari, East Champaran.

8. Smt. Sandhya Kumari, Circle Officer, Sadar, Motihari, East Champaran. 9. Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, The Civil Surgeon, Motihari, East Champaran.

10. Sri R.K.Mishra, The Chief Factory Inspector, Motihari, East Champaran.

11. Sri Rakesh Bhaskar, The Officer-in- Charge, Sadar, Motihari, East Champaran.

12. Sri Vishesh Singh ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Shekhar, Adv.

For the State : Mr. Prashant Pratap, GP2 Amicus Curiae : Mr. Ajay, Sr. Advocate For the Pollution Board : Mr. Shivendra Kishore, Sr. Advocate ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

14 06-02-2026 I.A. No. 01 of 2026 The aforesaid Interlocutory Application has been preferred for impleading the Intervenor respondent, Vishesh Kr. Singh as respondent no. 12 in the present case.

2. There is no opposition from the other sides.

3. In that background, I.A. No. 01 of 2026 is allowed.

4. Let the Intervenor-respondent be impleaded as respondent no. 12.

5. Office to do the needful.

MJC No. 2540 of 2024

6. Heard Mr. Ajay, learned Senior Counsel appearing as amicus curiae, Mr. Prashant Pratap, learned State Counsel, Mr. Shivendra Kishore, learned Senior Counsel for the Bihar State Pollution Control Board (henceforth for short ‘the Board’) and Mr. Vishesh Kumar Singh (in person) who has been impleaded as respondent no. 12 in the present case.

7. Pursuant to the last order, the DGP, Bihar has filed an affidavit according to which, the DIAL 112 Police has been successfully tagged and any complaint made after 10.00 PM is immediately taken care of. The said step is appreciable and will go a long way in curbing the noise pollution. The Court further expects that beside keeping the identity of the complainant confidential, the message showing compliance of the order shall also be communicated.

8. Mr. Ajay, learned Senior Counsel submits that the noise menace though reduced is still continuing despite efforts taken. The submission is that the SHOs of all the Police Stations in the Capital City have failed to curb the noise pollution during the day/evening time and the use of DJs in full volume is still continuing in each and every street of Patna.

9. The submission is that the affidavits filed by the SHOs are simply an eye wash. The S.H.O., Kadamkuan had earlier filed reply stating that certificates were taken from the DJ owners but the DJs are still operating under his jurisdiction completely hampering the studies of examinees as their annual examination is/are on the cards. He submits that the Kadamkuan P.S. has completely shrugged off his responsibility.

10. The further submission is that same is the condition of the Pibahore P.S. The SHO fails to understand that his area includes the University/its hostels as also Patna Medical College Hospital but he has not acted on curbing the noise pollution. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the Rupaspur P.S., Gandhi Maidan P.S. and the Buddha Colony P.S. are also in the same line who have chosen to look the other way.

11. In that backgro