Disposed¶21

Sk Najrul and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC18 Jul 2025WPA/1304/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Calcutta High Court; WPA 1304 of 2024; Sk. Najrul & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.; decided 18.07.2025 by Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.; writ of mandamus; enforcement of civil court decree/order; Title Suit No. 534 of 2022; Section 144 and Section 144(4) CrPC; M.P. Case No. 1288 of 2022; Executive Magistrate, Sadar, Purba Bardhaman; Burdwan Police Station; alternative statutory remedy; writ court self-restraint; writ court not an executing court; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; petition disposed of with liberty; no costs.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; the petitioners remain free to approach the appropriate forum with an appropriate application for redressal of their grievances; no order as to costs. ¶21

Sk Najrul and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; the petitioners remain free to approach the appropriate forum with an appropriate application for redressal of their grievances; no order as to costs.

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the Writ Court should direct the respondents, especially the Officer-in-Charge, Burdwan Police Station, to secure compliance with the order in Title Suit No. 534 of 2022 and the Executive Magistrate's order dated 5th August, 2022 in M.P. Case No. 1288 of 2022, notwithstanding the existence of efficacious alternative statutory remedies.

¶12

Court's answer

Under Section 144(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, an order passed by the Executive Magistrate remains valid for a period of two months from the date of its passing; accordingly, the order dated 5th August, 2022 has lapsed.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

The Executive Magistrate's order dated 5th August, 2022 is, as on date, nothing but a dead letter; consequently, there is no justification to direct the authority to take steps in compliance with that order.

¶14

Key takeaways

Where an alternative remedy, particularly a statutory remedy, exists, the Writ Court must exercise self-restraint; a Writ Court cannot be converted into an Executing Court nor be called upon to execute the order of a Civil Court, and non-compliance with a civil court's order is to be addressed through the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPA 1304 of 2024) seeking mandamus to the Officer-in-Charge, Burdwan Police Station, to enforce the order dated 24.09.2022 in Title Suit No. 534 of 2022 (Civil Judge (JD), 2nd Court, Burdwan) and the Executive Magistrate's order dated 5th August, 2022 in M.P. Case No. 1288 of 2022 (S. 144 CrPC): Held, by virtue of Section 144(4) CrPC the Magistrate's order remained valid only for two months and is now a dead letter, so no direction for its compliance is justified; compliance with the civil court's order must be pursued through the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and where such statutory remedy exists the Writ Court must exercise self-restraint and cannot act as an Executing Court. Petition disposed of; liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum; no costs. (Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)

¶1

18.07.2025. 21 Ct.No.7. sdas

¶2

WPA 1304 of 2024

¶3

Sk. Najrul & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶4

Mr. Balai Lal Sahu Mohammad Ali Mallick ..…for the petitioners

¶5

Mr. Rajarshi Basu Mr. S. T. Mina

¶6

….. for the State

¶7

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court be kept on record.

¶8

The present writ petition has been preferred praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the concerned respondents, especially the Officer-in-Charge, Burdwan Police Station, District Purba Bardhaman, to ensure that the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd Court, Burdwan in Title Suit No. 534 of 2022, and the order passed by the learned Executive Magistrate, Sadar, Purba Bardhaman, on 5th August, 2022 in a proceeding initiated by the petitioners in an application under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which was registered as M.P. Case No. 1288 of 2022, are complied with by the private respondents.

¶9

Mr. Mallick, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners would be

¶10

¶11

satisfied if the matter is remitted to the concerned respondents with a direction to consider the petitioners' grievances.

¶12

Mr. Basu, learned Advocate representing the State, submits that this writ petition cannot be entertained in view of existence of efficacious alternative remedy.

¶13

The record reveals that the learned Executive Magistrate, by passing an order dated 5^th August, 2022, directed the Officer-in-Charge, Burdwan Police Station, to maintain peace and tranquility over the suit property until disposal of the case.

¶14

I have been informed that M.P. Case No. 1288 of 2022 has already been disposed of. In accordance with the provisions of Section 144(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the order passed by the Executive Magistrate shall remain valid for a period of two months from the date of its passing. Therefore, the order dated 5th August, 2022 is, as on date, nothing but a dead letter. Consequently, there is no justification to direct the authority to take steps in compliance with the said order.

¶15

As noted previously, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking an order to secure compliance with the order dated 24.09.2022 passed by a competent Court of Law in a suit. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, provides the appropriate provisions

¶16

¶17

to address any non-compliance with the order passed by that Court.

¶18

Therefore, an alternative statutory remedy is available to the petitioners. It is well settled by a catena of decisions of the Honorable Supreme Court that where an alternative remedy, particularly a statutory remedy, exists, the Writ Court must exercise selfrestraint. A Writ Court cannot be converted into an Executing Court and cannot be called upon to execute the order passed by a Civil Court in a suit.

¶19

Accordingly, for this reason, I am not inclined to interfere in this writ petition.

¶20

However, this order shall not preclude the petitioners from approaching the appropriate forum with appropriate application to have their grievances redressed.

¶21

With these observations, the writ petition is, thus, disposed of. However, there will be no order as to costs.

¶22

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)

Sk Najrul and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sk Najrul and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ardhendu Mandal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Shankar Ranjan Das Vs Union of India and Ors.

Asikul Sk Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sandeep Karak Vs the Chief Electoral Officer and Ors.

Chinmayee Das Vs Punjab National Bank and Ors.

Sudipto Chaki Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.