This was an oral order in a criminal writ petition. The Court observed that the petitioner should have filed an eviction suit instead of the instant petition and disposed of the matter accordingly.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ No.561 of 2013
======================================================
Ramashray Sah S/O Late Sheo Nandan Sah R/O Village Nautan, P.S. Nautan, District Siwan.
.... .... Petitioner Versus
.... .... Respondents
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Patanjali Rishi, A.C. to AAG-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER
7. 03-01-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.C. to AAG-10. After going through the prayer, it is evident that instead of pursing with the instant petition, petitioner should have launched an eviction suit. With the aforesaid observation, instant petition is disposed of.
(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)
Pawan/-
Ramashray Sah
The State of Bihar
The District Magistrate, Siwan
The Superintendent of Police, Siwan
The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Siwan
Aditya Kumar Trivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
