Monoj Kumar Paul Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Domestic Violence | Calcutta HC (2026)

Monoj Kumar Paul Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Domestic Violence | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Police directed to keep strict vigil at the locale, maintain peace and tranquility, and render assistance/protection to the petitioner as and when sought; Officer in Charge, Bidhannagar North PS to depute a police personnel to visit the premises every alternate day for four weeks to assess any torture/assault upon the petitioner; petitioner at liberty to ventilate his grievance before the Sub-Divisional Officer under the Welfare and Maintenance of Senior Citizens Act, 2007; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, alleging severe torture and assault by the private respondents residing in the same house, is entitled to protection. +2 more

Court's answer

The plea of constructive res judicata does not bar the present application: the earlier writ petition contains prayers distinct from the present application, and only one of the prayers in both applications may be similar.

Ratio / Principle

Upon consideration of the submissions, the Court is of the prima facie view that the petitioner is a lessee in respect of the premises in question and the private respondents can at best be termed as licensees under him.

Key takeaways

Since the petitioner's application under the Welfare and Maintenance of Senior Citizens Act, 2007 before the Sub-Divisional Officer is pending, the petitioner is at liberty to ventilate his grievance before the said authority.ratio¶20
In the meantime, the police shall keep strict vigil at the locale, ensure maintenance of peace and tranquility, and render necessary assistance/protection to the petitioner as and when sought.ratio¶22
The Officer in Charge, Bidhannagar North PS (respondent no.3), shall depute a police personnel to visit the premises every alternate day for a period of four weeks to assess whether any torture/assault is meted out upon the petitioner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPA 2455 of 2026) by a senior citizen alleging severe torture and assault by the private respondents (his son and daughter-in-law) residing in the same premises. The Court, on submissions, prima facie held the petitioner to be a lessee of the premises and the private respondents to be at best licensees under him. The objection of constructive res judicata based on an earlier disposed writ petition was rejected, the prayers in the two petitions being distinct with possibly only one similar prayer. Noting the pendency of the Narazi application before the jurisdictional Magistrate, a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act lodged by respondent no.6, and the petitioner's pending application before the Sub-Divisional Officer under the Welfare and Maintenance of Senior Citizens Act, 2007, the Court disposed of the writ petition directing the police to keep strict vigil, render assistance/protection as and when sought, and directing the Officer in Charge, Bidhannagar North PS to depute a police personnel to visit the premises every alternate day for four weeks to assess any torture/assault upon the petitioner. No order as to costs; allegations deemed not admitted since no affidavit was invited.

06 05.02.2026 Ct. No.5 b.das

WPA 2455 of 2026

Monoj Kumar Paul Vs. The State of W. B. & Ors.

Mr. Kallol Basu Mr. Arijit Roy Mr. Samrat Choudhury Mr. Atreya Chakraborty Mr. Ronit Naskar Mr. A. Sahani …for the petitioner. Mr. Asish Kr. Guha Mr. Sanjib Das …for the State. Mr. Ayan Banerjee Mr. S. Chakraborty Ms. Debasree Dhamali Ms. Debolina Ghosh … for respondent nos.5 & 6.

Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record.

Heard learned counsels for the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 5^th respondent is the petitioner’s son and the 6^th respondent is the daughter in law.

The petitioner initially sought an additional room in the house in question for accommodation of his wife who was terminally ill.

The petitioner submits that his wife has expired on the day before yesterday, that is, 3^rd February, 2026. The petitioner alleges severe torture and assault upon him by the private respondents who reside in the same house with the petitioner.

2

Complaint lodged by the petitioner in this regard has been registered as FIR and charge sheet has been submitted upon completion of investigation. The petitioner filed a Narazi application before the jurisdictional Magistrate, which is pending.

The petitioner seeks protection.

Learned counsel for the private respondents submits that the petitioner is not a lessee in respect of the premises in question. A similar writ petition filed by the petitioner earlier has been disposed of by this Court and the present application is barred by constructive res judicata. Allegations made by the petitioner are far from truth. It is the petitioner who tortured his wife as well as the private respondents and sought their eviction from the premises in question.

The 6^th respondent has lodged a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act against the petitioner which is pending.

The petitioner denies and disputes the said allegations.

Learned counsel for the State submits that investigation pertaining to the complaint lodged by the petitioner has been concluded.

Upon consideration of the submission made on behalf of the parties, this Court is of the view that it prima facie appears that the petitioner is a lessee in respect of the

3

premises in question. The private respondents can at best be termed as licensees under him in the said premises.

The petitioner filed an application before the SubDivisional Officer under the Welfare and Maintenance of Senior Citizens Act, 2007 which is pending. The petitioner is at liberty to ventilate his grievance before the said authority.

The earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner contains prayers which are distinct and from that of the present application. Only one of the prayers in both the applications may be similar.

In the meantime, the police shall keep strict vigil at the locale and ensure maintenance of peace and tranquility. The police shall render necessary assistance/protection to the petitioner as and when sought.

The Officer in Charge, Bidhannagar North PS, being the 3^rd respondent herein, shall depute a police personnel who shall visit the premises in question every alternate day for a period of four weeks in order to assess whether any torture/assault is meted out upon the petitioner.

With the above observation and directions the writ petition is disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted.

4

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)