Dismissed¶29

Kameshwar Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Sept 2025CR. WJC/1225/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Police protection writ petition dismissed as misconceived/not maintainable; land dispute (24 decimal, Khata 128, Plot 564, Mauza Tarokhar, Nalanda); Section 107 CrPC proceeding initiated and dropped; State cannot provide police security to every citizen; remedy lies in civil suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction / private guards; Patna High Court; CR. WJC No.1225 of 2021; decided 16-09-2025 by Justice Jitendra Kumar; liberty to take legal steps as advised.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petitioner left at liberty to take legal steps, as advised. ¶29

Kameshwar Prasad Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; petitioner left at liberty to take legal steps, as advised.

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent-police authorities are obliged to provide security to the petitioner, who apprehends forcible dispossession of, and threat to himself regarding, land in dispute with private respondents. +1 more

¶21

Court's answer

In such facts and circumstances, the petitioner's remedy is to file a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction against the private respondents.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is misconceived because the matter is essentially a land dispute between the parties, with the petitioner having apprehension of forcible dispossession and threat from the private respondents.

¶27

Key takeaways

If the petitioner has any threat from any of the private respondents, he can engage private guards, because the State cannot provide police security to each and every citizen of the State.ratio¶28
The writ petition was accordingly dismissed as not maintainable, while leaving the petitioner at liberty to take legal steps as advised.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Jitendra Kumar, J) dismissed as not maintainable a criminal writ jurisdiction case (CR. WJC No.1225 of 2021, decided 16-09-2025) in which the petitioner sought a direction to police authorities to provide him security, alleging threat and attempted forcible dispossession by private respondents in a dispute over 24 decimal of land (Khata No. 128, Plot No. 564, Mauza Tarokhar, Nalanda), which had spawned Revenue Court litigations and a Section 107 Cr.PC proceeding that was initiated and dropped. Holding the petition misconceived, the Court held that where a dispute is of a private/civil nature the petitioner's remedy is a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction, and that any threatened individual may engage private guards because the State cannot provide police security to each and every citizen; the petitioner was left at liberty to take legal steps as advised.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1225 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Nalanda

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Kameshwar Prasad, Son Of Late Tota Mahto, Resident Of Village + P.O.Raitar, P.S.- Giriyak, District- Nalanda.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

The District Magistrate, Nalanda, Biharsharif

¶9

The Superintendent of Police, Nalanda, Biharsharif

¶10

¶11

¶12

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rajgir, District- Nalanda.

¶13

The Station House Officer, Giriyak Police Station, District- Nalanda.

¶14

Karu Yadav Son of Late Baldev Yadav Resident of Village- Guljarbigha, P.S.- Giriyak, District- Nalanda.

¶15

Saryug Yadav Son of Late Baldev Yadav Resident of Village- Guljarbigha, P.S.- Giriyak, District- Nalanda.

¶16

Musfafir Yadav Son of Late Baldev Yadav Resident of Village- Guljarbigha, P.S.- Giriyak, District- Nalanda.

¶17

Damodar Sao Son of Late Bisheshwar Sao Resident of Village- Tarokhar, P.S.- Giriyak, District- Nalanda.

¶18

... ... Respondent/s

¶19

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Venkatesh Kaushik, Advocate For the State : Mr. Deepak Kumar, AC to GP-4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶20

6 16-09-2025 The present petition has been preferred for direction

¶21

to the Respondent-Police Authorities to provide security to the petitioner.

¶22

As per the averment made in the writ petition, there is dispute between the petitioner and Respondent No. 9 in regard to 24 decimal of land bearing Khata No. 128, Plot No. 564, situated in Mauza Tarokhar, Police Station, Giriyak,

¶23

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1225 of 2021(6) dt.16-09-2025 2/3

¶24

District – Nalanda and there are series of litigations between them before the Revenue Courts. Respondent No. 9 is trying to dispossess the petitioner forcibly from the land in question and even a proceeding under Section 107 Cr.PC was initiated and dropped.

¶25

As per further averment made in the writ petition, the private respondents are muscle men and criminal minded and the petitioner has apprehension of threat from them.

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.C. to G.P.-4.

¶27

Apparently, the present writ petition is misconceived. There is land dispute between the parties and the petitioner has apprehension of forcible dispossession from the land and even threat from the private respondents.

¶28

In such facts and circumstances, the petitioner has remedy to file Suit for declaration of Title and permanent injunction against the private respondents and if he has any threat from any of the private respondents, he can engage his private guards, because State cannot provide police security to each and every citizen of the State.

¶29