Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Nurul Islam vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 1 October, 2024
Author: Hiranmay Bhattacharyya
Bench: Hiranmay Bhattacharyya
135
01.10.2024
mb
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
W.P.A. No. 5206 of 2024
Nurul Islam
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Nitai Chandra Saha,
Mr. Abhijit Chandra Majumder
...for the petitioner
Ms. Noelle Banerjee
...for the State
Mr. Ayan Banerjee,
Ms. Debjani Sengupta,
Ms. Poulomi Ghatak
...for the respondent nos. 7,8,10 & 11
After some arguments, learned Advocate for the
petitioner submits that he is not pressing the relief
claimed in the prayer (b) of the writ petition, which
runs as follows:
"b) A writ in the nature of Mandamus
commanding the respondent police authority
and the BL and LRO authority to ensure the
judgment and decree passed in Partition Suit
38 of 1993 passed by the learned Civil Judge
(Sr. Divn.) at Raiganj as to final allotment of
the land being the land measuring about 0.66
decimal being part of C.S. Khatian No. 50 and
Dag No. 6 and New Dag No. 7 and All that
piece and parcel of land measuring 2.20
and New Dag No. 69, 73 situated and lying in
Mouza Uttar Shankarpur and all that piece
and parcel of land measuring about 1.18
and New Dag No. 311, 312 situated and lying
in Mouza: Nehalipara and all that piece and
parcel of land measuring about 0.22 decimal
New Dag No. 204 and all that piece and
parcel land measuring about 0.98 decimal
being part of JL No. 41 Dag No. 238 and New
Dag No. 207 and all that piece and parcel of
the land measuring about 0.09 decimal being
situated and lying in Mouza Pandara be not
violated by the private respondents and their
men and agents forcibly."
The petitioner alleges that the private
respondents herein have looted the crops cultivated
by the petitioner on a portion of a cultivable land,
which has been allotted to the petitioner by virtue
of a final decree in a suit for partition.
Mr. Banerjee, learned Advocate appearing for
the private respondents submits that an appeal has
been filed before the learned District Judge, Uttar
Dinajpur at Raiganj, being Partition Appeal No. 02
of 2024 challenging the final decree passed in
connection with Partition Suit No. 38 of 1993. Mr.
Banerjee submits that the petitioner is in
possession of a portion of the property, which is the
subject matter of the partition appeal.
Since the property is yet to be partitioned by
metes and bounds, every co-sharer has a right over
every inch of the property.
In view thereof, this Court is not inclined to
grant any relief directing the police authorities to
ensure possession of the petitioner in respect of the
portion allotted in favour of the petitioner by virtue
of the final decree pending the partition appeal.
The learned Advocate for the State files an
undated report of the I/C Kaliyaganj Police Station
wherein it has been stated that pursuant to the
complaint lodged by the petitioner, the police
authorities has submitted a prosecution under
Section 107 of the Criminal procedure Code vide
RO No. 186/2024 dated February 10, 2024.
Therefore, it appears that police authorities have
taken steps on the basis of the complaint lodged by
the petitioner.
Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits
that taking advantage of the pendency of the
partition appeal, the private respondents are
creating disturbances in the possession of the
petitioner in respect of the said property.
The petitioner is, however, left free to approach
the learned Court where the partition appeal is
pending for appropriate reliefs in that regard.
With the above observations and directions,
this writ petition stands disposed of.
The Officer-in-Charge, Kaliyaganj Police
Station, being the fourth respondent herein, is
directed to ensure that no breach of peace takes
place at the locale.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if
applied for, be made available to the parties upon
compliance of necessary formalities.
(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)
