Ram Kumar Satpathi & Anr vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 18 May, 2017

1

18.05.2017
638.
as

W.P.13974 (W) of 2017

Ram Kumar Satpathi Anr.
Versus
The State of West Bengal Ors.

Mr. Rwitendra Banerjee.

…for the Petitioners.

Md. T. M. Siddiqui,
Sm. Samim Ullah.

…for the State.

Mr. Prasanta Kumar Pakrashi.

…for the Respondent Nos.5 6.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the private respondent

nos.5 and 6 are wrongfully interfering with the right of the petitioners to

peacefully occupy and enjoy their own premises. Representation has been made

to the police authorities, but no steps have been taken in the matter.

Learned Advocate appearing for the private respondents denies such

allegations and submits that it was the petitioners and other in laws who

subjected the respondent no.6 to cruelty resulting in registration of criminal case

against them.

Report is filed on behalf of the State wherefrom it appears that case and

counter have been registered by and between the parties being Kotwali Police

Station Case No.163 of 2017 dated 20.2.2017 under Sections 323/324/325/34

of the Indian Penal Code and Kotwali Police Station Case No.188 of 2017 dated
2

31.3.2017 under Sections 498A/323/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal

case registered at the behest of the petitioners has ended in a charge sheet. The

said report be kept with the record. Copies of the report be handed over to the

learned Advocate appearing for the respective parties.

In view of the aforesaid facts, it appears that there is a family dispute

between the petitioners on one hand and the respondent Nos.5 and 6 on the

READ  Mukesh vs State on 3 April, 2017

other hand.

Criminal cases registered by and between the parties shall be proceeded

with utmost expedition and be concluded at an early date.

The respondent no.4, Officer in charge Police Station Midnapore Kotwali,

District-Paschim Midnapore shall ensure that there is no breach of peace and

tranquility in an around the premises occupied by the parties.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

Since no affidavit-in-opposition has been called for, the allegations made in

the writ application deemed not to have been admitted by the respondents.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, shall be given to

the parties, as expeditiously as possible on compliance of all necessary

formalities.

( Joymalya Bagchi, J.)
3

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *