Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
(Mst. Monoara Bibi & Anr vs The State Of West Bengal on 8 January, 2014
Author: Dipankar Datta
Bench: Dipankar Datta
-: 1 : -
9
08.01. 2014
rrc
W. P. 37856 (W) of 2013
(Mst. Monoara Bibi & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal
& Ors.)
Mr. Sandip Ghosh
.....For the petitioners
Ms. Sanghamitra Nandy
Ms. Paramita Pal
......For the State
Mr. Abhijit Pal
......For the respdt. no. 6
Alleging inaction on the part of the police to take necessary
action on the basis of the written complaint of the second
petitioner dated 21st November, 2013, this writ petition has been
presented before the Court.
In course of hearing, it has been brought to my notice that an
application for temporary injunction filed by the private
respondents in connection with a suit instituted by them has been
dismissed by an order dated 15th May, 2013. In such order, it has been observed that the petitioners have been able to show their prima facie title and possession over the suit tank.
Admittedly, no appeal has been preferred against the said order dated 15th May, 2013. However, learned advocate representing the private respondents submits that without obtaining conversion of the status of the tank, the petitioners are attempting to raise construction thereon.
-: 2 : -
Ms. Nandy, learned advocate representing the official respondents submits that the second petitioner had previously submitted a written complaint against the private respondents on 30th June, 2013, whereupon Basirhat P. S. Case No. 909 dated 30th June, 2013 under Sections 447/323/379/354/427/504/506/34, Indian Penal Code was registered and investigation thereof has culminated in filing of charge-sheet on 4th January, 2014 against the private respondents under the aforesaid provisions of law. It has further been submitted by her that on 21st November, 2013, the second petitioner lodged a further complaint and in course of a probe into the allegations that were levelled, the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Basirhat P.S. found that there was possibility of serious breach of peace in the locality and accordingly, prosecution vide Basirhat P. S. NCR No. 12069 dated 24th December, 2013 under Section 107, Cr.P.C. has been submitted against the respondents. A recent complaint of the first petitioner received on 2nd January, 2014, she submits, revealed a non-cognizable offence and, therefore, a prayer has been submitted before the Court of the learned A.C.J.M., Basirhat for necessary permission to investigate under Section 145 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. According to her, the allegation of police inaction is without any basis. Having regard to the aforesaid factual narrative, I do not see reason to hold that the police has been remiss in discharging its
-: 3 : -
statutory duty. However, since possibility of breach of peace has been found and the civil court at the interlocutory stage has ruled against the private respondents in respect of their prima facie title and possession over the suit tank, the police authorities shall ensure that so long the civil suit is not disposed of and the order of injunction subsists, the private respondents do not interfere with the petitioners' possession of the suit tank. The police authorities shall also ensure that no construction is raised on the suit tank without obtaining appropriate permission from the land reforms authorities.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
There shall, however, be no order for costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.
(Dipankar Datta, J.)