Disposed¶17

Raju Ghosh v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC22 Nov 2024WPA/4404/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Police inaction; land grabbing and conversion of land; threat and abuse; trespass; unauthorized construction; non-cognizable offence; BL & LRO; Rishra Police Station; section 107/116(3) Code of Criminal Procedure; section 175(3)/section 223 BNSS; jurisdictional criminal court; police vigil; breach of peace; safety and security; writ petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

W.P.A. 4404 of 2024 along with CAN 1 of 2024 disposed of: petitioner left free to approach the jurisdictional criminal court under section 175(3)/section 223 of the BNSS; police authorities directed to continue vigil and prevent breach of peace; the State's report kept on record and a copy handed over to the learned advocate for the petitioner. ¶17

Raju Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the police authorities failed to take action on the petitioner's complaints dated 14.10.2023 and 29.12.2023 alleging that the private respondents illegally grabbed and converted his land, threatened him, and committed trespass and unauthorized construction.

¶9

Court's answer

Prima facie, so far as the allegations regarding threatening are concerned, the same makes out a non-cognizable offence; however, there were other allegations of trespass and unauthorized construction.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Since the police authorities have kept a strict vigil over the area, if the police have not taken any steps, the petitioner would approach the jurisdictional criminal court and invoke its powers under section 175(3)/section 223 of the BNSS, and that court would exercise its discretion and pass necessary orders adhering to the provisions of law.

¶13

Key takeaways

Having regard to the petitioner's apprehension relating to his safety and security, the police authorities are directed to continue their vigil and ensure that no breach of peace takes place and/or no untoward incident stems out of the issues between the petitioner and the private respondents.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (W.P.A. 4404 of 2024, decided 22.11.2024, Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) by a landowner complaining of police inaction on his complaints dated 14.10.2023 and 29.12.2023 to the Officer-in-Charge, Rishra Police Station, alleging that private respondents had illegally grabbed and converted his land, threatened him, and committed trespass and unauthorized construction. The State's report recorded that proceedings had been drawn up under section 107/116(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Holding that, prima facie, the threatening allegations made out a non-cognizable offence while other allegations concerned trespass and unauthorized construction, and noting the police had kept strict vigil over the area, the Court held that if the police had not taken steps the petitioner could approach the jurisdictional criminal court and invoke its powers under section 175(3)/section 223 of the BNSS. Directing the police to continue their vigil and ensure no breach of peace or untoward incident, and keeping the State's report on record with a copy to the petitioner's advocate, the petition and CAN 1 of 2024 were disposed of.

¶1

D/L 61 22.11.2024 Kausik ct.no.35

¶2

W.P.A. 4404 of 2024 With CAN 1 of 2024

¶3

Raju Ghosh Versus State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶4

Mr. Rahul Sarkar Ms. Dipika Sarkar

¶5

…for the petitioner.

¶6

Mr. K.J. Yusuf, Ld. AGP Ms. Rupsha Chakraborty

¶7

…for the state.

¶8

Petitioner complains that his land has been illegally grabbed by the private respondents and has also been converted. To that effect, he has taken steps before the BL & LRO. However, when he protested to such illegal activities of the private respondents, they threatened him of dire consequences and abused him by saying that they will not close their shop/market which they have illegally constructed.

¶9

Petitioner on or about 14.10.2023 complained to the police authorities thereafter, on or about 29.12.2023, again informed through the learned advocate to the Officer-in-Charge, Rishra Police Station. Petitioner submits that till date no action has been taken by the police authorities.

¶10

¶11

Report has been submitted by the state which reflects that proceedings have been drawn up under section 107/116(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶12

Having considered the complaint which was addressed on 14.10.2023, prima facie, it reflects that so far as the allegations regarding threatening is concerned, the same makes out a non-cognizable offence. However, there were other allegations of trespass and unauthorized construction.

¶13

In view of the police authorities keeping a strict vigil over the area, I am of the opinion that if the police authorities have not taken any steps in the circumstances, the petitioner would approach the jurisdictional criminal court and invoke its powers under section 175(3)/section 223 of the BNSS. The learned jurisdictional criminal court would exercise its discretion and pass necessary orders adhering to the provisions of law.

¶14

However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner apprehends relating to his safety and security, I direct that the police authorities would continue their vigil and would ensure that no breach of peace takes place and/or any untoward incident stems out of the issues for which the petitioner and the private respondents are at loggerheads.

¶15

¶16

With the aforesaid observations WPA 4404 of

¶17

2024 along with CAN 1 of 2024 is disposed of.

¶18

Report so submitted by the state be kept with the record.

¶19

A copy of the report be handed over to the

¶20

learned advocate appearing for the petitioner.

¶21