Patna High Court
Naresh Sahni vs The State Of Bihar on 29 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73389 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Naresh Sahni, Son of Late Metho Sahni @ Mato Sahni;
2. Indu Devi, Wife of Naresh Sahni;
Both are resident of Village - Kachhari Road, Ward No. 25, P.S. -
Chitragupta Nagar, District - Khagaria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Rita Devi, Wife of Late Manikant Prasad, resident of Village - Baisha, P.O. +
P.S. - Maraiya, District - Khagaria.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arghesh Kumar, Advocate
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ghosarvey, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
C.A.V. JUDGMENT
Date : 29-08-2025
Heard Mr. Arghesh Kumar, the learned
counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Sanjay Kumar
Ghosarvey, the learned counsel for the opposite party No.
2. The State has been represented by Mr. Mohammad
Sufyan, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The present application has been filed on
behalf of the petitioners against the order dated 13-09-
2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Khagaria in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
2/11
Cr. Revision No. 52 of 2023, whereby the learned
Sessions Judge has been pleased to dismiss the revision
application filed by the petitioners, wherein the order
dated 18-04-2023 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional
Magistrate, Khagaria (in short the "SDM, Khagaria") in
Misc. Case No. 3(M) of 2023 was challenged.
3. The brief facts giving rise to the present
application is to the effect that the petitioners have stated
that the land in question was their ancestral property and
they were coming in peaceful possession over the same
since 1914 and after consecutive generations, presently
they are residing there and a tea stall is running over the
same. It is further stated that the petitioners are coming
in peaceful possession over the disputed land since long.
However, all of a sudden, without the knowledge of the
petitioners, the opposite party No. 2 got a sale-deed
executed in her favour through a stranger, stated to have
been executed some time in the year 1987. It is further
alleged that the opposite party No. 2, in collusion with the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
3/11
Revenue Authorities, even got the land in question
mutated in her name and the land receipts were issued
and Jamabandi was also created in her name.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioners has submitted that they being the illiterate
persons were not aware of such entries in the Revenue
records. It has further been alleged that almost after
three decades of the said purchase, the opposite party
No. 2 filed an application before the SDM, Khagaria upon
which, a miscellaneous case, bearing Case No. 3(M) of
2023, was initiated and notices were issued to the
petitioners. Thereafter, another notice was issued and
served upon the petitioners on 02-05-2023 by which it
was ordered by the learned SDM, Khagaria to the
petitioners to vacate the place/house in question, without
any speaking order. The petitioners have also alleged
that even with the notice, there was no order attached
and as such, being aggrieved by the order dated 18-04-
2023 as well as the notice dated 02-05-2023, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
4/11
petitioners preferred Criminal Revision No. 52 of 2023
before the learned Sessions Judge, Khagaria.
5. It has been contended on behalf of the
petitioners that they were illiterate persons and had no
knowledge of the documents. However, the learned
Revisional Court, on the ground that the petitioners could
not produce any document in order to support their case,
dismissed the revision application.
6. It has been submitted on behalf of the
petitioners that both the orders impugned in the present
application, viz., 18-04-2023 and 13-09-2023, referred
to above, have been passed without appreciating the fact
that the petitioners are in peaceful possession over the
disputed land for a very longtime since 1914 and that
itself has created rightful title of the petitioners over the
said land. It has also been submitted that the opposite
party No. 2 had approached the authorities concerned
after more than three decades which itself goes on to
show that over the said disputed land, there is a long
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
5/11
possession of the petitioners and, therefore, the same
should not be disturbed in a quasi-judicial proceeding.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioners has
thus submitted that the impugned orders, referred to
above, are fit to be set aside.
8. Per contra, the learned counsel for the
opposite party No. 2 has submitted, in reference to the
counter affidavit filed on her behalf, that the petitioners
have not approached this Court with clean hands and
have also not brought forward the entire facts. It has
been submitted that the sale-deed No. 892 was executed
on 27-05-1997 in favour of the opposite party No. 2, who
had applied for mutation and the same was entered in her
name in the Revenue records of the Government and a
separate Jamabandi, bearing No. 3895, was also opened
and rent receipt was being issued in her name up-to
2022-23.
9
. It has further been submitted on behalf of
the opposite party No. 2 that though the petitioners have
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
claimed to be residing over the land in question since
1914, but not a single document has been produced or
filed before this Court by the petitioners in order to
corroborate their claim and, moreover, in the application
filed before the Revisional Court, the petitioners in
paragraph 8(h) of the petition filed before the learned
Sessions Judge, Khagaria have stated that they have
been residing with their family since 1987 over the said
land, which is contrary to the claim being made before
this Court. It has also been submitted that the petitioners
run a tea shop and they had requested the opposite party
No. 2 to allow them to run the same with an undertaking
that they would remove/vacate the same as and when the
opposite party No. 2 would ask.
10. The attention of this Court has been
drawn by the learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2
towards Annexure - OP-2/C, which is the copy of
Khagaria P.S. Case No. 251 of 2021 and which was
lodged against petitioner No. 1 as the police had found
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
that in the garb of tea stall, anti-social elements were
assembled there and illegal trade of country made liquor
was being carried out from the said shop and the
petitioner was found to be involved in the same.
11. It has further been contended that the
petitioners along with their family members are not
allowing the opposite party No. 2 to enter her land. The
forceful and aggressive behaviour by the petitioners and
their family members attracted another criminal case
against them vide Khagaria P.S. Cse No. 811 of 2022
lodged by one Sanjit Kumar, which has also been brought
on record by way of Annexure - OP-2/D to this
application.
12. It has been submitted on behalf of the
opposite party No. 2 that on account of some illegal
activities being carried out under the garb of tea shop of
the petitioners, an application was made before the SDM,
Khagaria, requesting him to remove the same as also a
temporary bamboo made hut. On such application, an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
enquiry was conducted by the Circle Officer, Khagaria.
Upon submission of the report by the Circle Officer, the
petitioners were asked to submit papers in support of
their contention. However, the petitioners could not
submit any document to support their claim of their
rightful title and possession over the said land and
thereafter, the order for removal was passed. It has also
been submitted that the Revisional Court had very rightly
dismissed the revision application, stating that there was
no document brought forward by the petitioners in
support of their claim of title over the said land for a long
period.
13. It has lastly been submitted by the
learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 that in view
of the aforesaid, the present application, being
misconceived, should be dismissed with cost.
14. Having heard the learned counsel for the
parties, this Court has found that the Miscellaneous Case
No. 3(M) of 2023 was initiated on the application made
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
by the opposite party No. 2, wherein the learned SDM,
Khagria, after a thorough enquiry, found that the land in
question belonged to the opposite party No. 2, which was
purchased through a registered sale-deed and her name
has also been entered into the Revenue records of the
Government and the land possession certificate has also
been issued later in her favour.
15. This Court also finds that in reply to the
claim of the opposite party No. 2, the petitioners could
not submit any documentary evidence in support of their
rightful title and possession over the said land. Taking
into account such facts, the learned SDM, Khagaria went
on to hold that the petitioners are trying to forcefully
enter the said land, which exists right in front of Civil
Court, Khagaria and the Office of the Collector, Khagaria
is also adjacent to the said land. The SDM, Khagaria has
further gone on to hold that it is the petitioners who have
tried to forcefully capture the land of the opposite party
No. 2 and unnecessarily been creating a right title over
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
the said land. The SDM, Khagaria, therefore, looking at
the dispute in question which would cause breach of law
and order and on account of the administrative
exigencies, passed the order dated 18.04.2023, directing
the petitioners to remove the hutment; otherwise the
same would be forcibly vacated.
16. This Court has perused both the orders
impugned in the present application, referred to above,
and has found that both the Courts below have gone into
the question of rightful possession and title of the
petitioners over the said land. However, not a single
document has been produced by the petitioners to prove
their right over the said land, which is enough to suggest
that the petitioners are trying to forcibly capture the said
land of the opposite party No. 2 by constructing a
temporary hutment over the same and, therefore, both
the Courts below have rightly directed for forceful
removal of the hutment of the petitioners over the said
land on which they do not have any right and title and are
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73389 of 2023 dt.29-08-2025
indulged in illegal activity from the same.
17. It is a settled law that any claim over the
property has to be supported by relevant documents in
proof of such title. However, in the case in hand, very
importantly, not a single document has been brought
forward by the petitioners either before the learned
Courts below or before this Court, which goes on to show
that they are enforcing their right over the said land,
which, prima facie, belongs to the opposite party No. 2 by
virtue of sale-deed executed in her favour way-back in
the year 1987.
18. In such view of the matter, this Court
does not find any illegality in the orders impugned in the
present application, referred to above.
19. The application is dismissed accordingly.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 31/07/2025
Uploading Date 29/08/2025
Transmission Date 29/08/2025
