CW-2002-0004Nawada, BiharJudgment 6 August 2002

Govindpur Man v. State of Bihar and Others

The judgment of the Patna High Court records the following account. Justice R.S. Garg held that Officer-in-[name withheld] of Govindpur police station wrongly arrested a Govindpur man on 27 October 2000 in execution of a non-bailable warrant issued in Excise Case 24/99 against Rajo Choudhary (the nickname of his brother [name withheld]), despite protests by family, neighbours and the chowkidar, leading to 120+ days in jail till the JMFC Nawada ordered release on 28 February 2001. The Court rejected the Section 76 IPC bona-fide-mistake defence, noting the officer persisted with a false stand instead of seeking a second opinion. It awarded Rs 50,000 compensation (Rs 40,000 by the State plus Rs 10,000 personally by the officer) payable within two months, leaving prosecution of the officer to the State authorities. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

Externally reportedV2
What this record means

This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.

How verification works →

Report card

By judgment dated 6 August 2002 in Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 192 of 2001, the Patna High Court (Coram: R.S. Garg, J.) returned findings adverse to the Officer-in-Charge, Govindpur PS, Nawada, and directed payment of compensation of Rs 50,000.

Register number
BR 27 CW 0001
Case reference
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 192 of 2001 / (2002) 3 PLJR 637
Court and date
Patna High Court (Coram: R.S. Garg, J.), 6 August 2002
Officer(s) at the material time
Officer-in-Charge, Govindpur PS, Nawada
Present service status
Not ascertained from the cited sources.
Provisions invoked
Section 76 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Finding of the Court (extract)
“We live in the rule of law and not under the police rule where whatever is done by the police is taken to be absolutely correct.” (at para 15)
Verdict, sentence and quantum
Adverse finding + compensation. Sentence: compensation only. Compensation: Rs 50,000.
Present status of the proceedings
No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.

Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.

The Patna High Court judgment dated 6 August 2002 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.

Recorded allegations

1
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported

Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.

Official finding: supports allegation.

What the court found

Holding not recorded separately.

“We live in the rule of law and not under the police rule where whatever is done by the police is taken to be absolutely correct.” (para 15)

Institutional response

1
6 Aug 2002

Order issued

Concluded
Patna High Court External · Binding

The Patna High Court recorded adverse findings against police personnel and ordered Rs 50,000.

Compensation ordered · Supports allegation (for the compensated wrong only).
Source: (2002) 3 PLJR 637
Not yet re-checked.

Follow-up history

1
19 Sep 2026

(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))

Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.

Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.

Keep exploring

These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.