STATE OF BIHAR Vs. ANIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging the order dtd. 30/4/2025 passed in M.J.C. No. 3368 of 2024. The operative portion of the order passed in M.J.C. reads as follows:-

(2.) This M.J.C. No. 3368 of 2024 arose out of C.W.J.C. No. 6902 of 2022 against the order dtd. 30/4/2025. The opposite party, Anil Kumar approached this Court with the following relief:-

(3.) The scope of contempt proceeding is strictly confined to the four corners of an order or specific prayers made in the underlying writ petition, meaning a Court cannot expand the scope of original order or grant new relief testing allegations of disobedience. Contempt jurisdiction is not a substitute for execution proceeding, It cannot be used to direct compliance with things not explicitly ordered. Contempt can only be established if there is a willful and deliberate violation of the specific directions in the judgment/orders. If specific relief was not asked for in the writ petition, the contempt Court cannot later include it in its enforcement orders. Thus, while exercising contempt power, the Court should not issue supplementary directions. If the original order is vague, the proper remedy is to seek clarification from the Court that passed the original order, rather than to expand its scope through contempt proceedings.