Khalilur Rahman v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Feb 2026CWJC/10813/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land grabbing / encroachment; protection of possession and occupation; khata/khesra mutation and rent payment; registered sale deed dated 09.04.1965; Article 300-A right to property; due process of law; failure of district administration and police (DM, SDO, SP, DSP, CO, SHO Barsoi/Katihar); disposal with executive direction to DM-cum-Collector Katihar; Katihar, Bihar; CWJC No.10813 of 2021; Honourable Mr. Justice Purnendu Singh; oral judgment; no precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Katihar to forthwith take action in respect of the petitioner's property in accordance with law after communication of the order, pursuant to the court's finding that Article 300-A mandates State authorities to protect the lawful owner. ¶¶29

Khalilur Rahman Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in possession of land appertaining to Khata No.265, Khesra No.966, total area 0.14 decimals, Mauza Gondhara, District Katihar, should be protected from neighbouring respondents (nos. 9-27) attempting to grab or encroach the land and interfere with his peaceful possession. +1 more

¶¶24

Court's answer

The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Katihar is directed to forthwith take action in respect of the petitioner's property in accordance with law after communication of this order to him.

¶¶27

Ratio / Principle

The right to property enshrined in Article 300-A of the Constitution of India mandates the State authorities to protect the petitioner, who is the lawful owner of the land holding valid title on the basis of a registered sale deed dated 09.04.1965.

¶¶27

Key takeaways

Due process of law has to be taken into consideration by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Katihar, and the authorities in the State of Bihar have totally failed to abide by the due process of law.ratio¶¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil writ (CWJC No.10813 of 2021, Patna High Court, Purnendu Singh, J, decision 05-02-2026): Petitioner Khalilur Rahman, owner in possession of 0.14 decimals of land (Khata No.265, Khesra No.966, Mauza Gondhara, District Katihar) purchased by registered sale deed dated 09.04.1965 and mutated in the Anchal Sirista, sought protection against neighbouring respondents (nos. 9-27) allegedly attempting to grab/encroach the land, the District Magistrate, SDO and police having failed to intervene despite complaints. The court held that Article 300-A of the Constitution mandates State authorities to protect the rights of the lawful owner holding valid title, found that due process of law had to be followed by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Katihar, and directed him to forthwith take action in respect of the petitioner's property in accordance with law after communication of the order; the writ petition was disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10813 of 2021

¶2

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

¶3

Khalilur Rahman Son of Late Safar Mahummad Resident of village- Ganjan, P.o.- Barsoiand, District- Katihar

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

¶7

1. The Home Commissioner, Government of Bihar, patna 3. The District Magistrate, Katihar 4. The Superintendent of Police, Katihar 5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Barsoi, Katihar 6. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Barsoi, Katihar 7. The Circle Officer, Barsoi, District- Katihar 8. The S.H.O. Barsoi, Katihar 9. Md. Sakur Son of Chainuddin 10. Muhmmad Majo Son of Chainuddin 11. Latif Son of Chainuddin 12. Samsul Haque Son of Chainuddin 13. Jamshed Ali Son of Jumar Ali 14. Md. Haroon Son of Jumar Ali 15. Jahrul Son of Jumar Ali 16. Md. Jamiruddin Son of Namiruddin 17. Md. Samrul Son of Namiruddin 18. Jer Mahamad Son of Namiruddin 19. Mohbud Son of Gayasuddin 20. Abba Son of Gayasuddin 21. Anwara Khatun Wife of Md. Sakur 22. Saleka Khatun Wife of Jamshed Ali 23. Sarbanoo Khatun Wife of Haroon 24. Raijina Khatun Wife of Latif 25. Saleka Khatun Wife of Muhammad Majo 26. Muhmmad Rahim Son of Basiruddin 27. Sukojan Wife of Md. Rahim Resident Nos. 9 to 27 are resident of Gondhara, P.o.- Ganjan, P.s.- Barsoi and District- Katihar

¶8

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

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

Patna High Court CWJC No.10813 of 2021 dt.05-02-2026 2/4

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Binay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Raj Kishore Roy ( Gp18 )

¶13

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

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT

¶15

Date : 05-02-2026

¶16

Heard Mr. Binay Kumar, learned counsel appearing

¶17

on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Raj Kishore Roy, learned GP 18 for the State.

¶18

2.Petitioner has inter alia prayed for following

¶19

reliefs in the paragraphs No.1 of the writ petition:- :

¶20

“(I) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to provide protection to the petitioner in respect of his land mentioned in this writ petition

¶21

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the respondents from interfering in the peaceful possession and occupation in respect of the land in question.

¶22

(iii) For issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction for grant of any other relief or reliefs which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶23

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶24

petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in possession of land, appertaining to Khata No.265, Khesra No.966, total area of 0.14 decimals, situated in Mauza Gondhara, District, Katihar. The aforesaid land was purchased vide a registered sale deed dated 09.04.1965 and the name of the petitioner has been mutated in the Anchal Sirista. Thereafter, the petitioner has been paying rent. Petitioner is aggrieved by the action of his neighbours,

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.10813 of 2021 dt.05-02-2026 3/4

¶26

who are adamant to grab the land by taking law in their own hands. Petitioner has approached several authorities, like the District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Officer and police officials but they have not stopped the unauthorized action of the neighbours of the petitioner, who has been impleaded as respondents no.9 to 27 in the present writ petition. Petitioner has not admitted in the present writ petition that he has been dispossessed from the land in question, rather his neighbours are disturbing him from peaceful possession and are adamant to encroach the said land belonging to the petitioner.

¶27

In such circumstances, due process of law has to be taken into consideration by the District Magistrate-cumCollector, Katihar and the authorities in the State of Bihar have totally failed to abide by the due process of law. The right to property as enshrined in Article 300-A of the Constitution of India mandates the State authorities to protect the rights of the petitioner, who is the lawful owner of the land, holding valid title on the basis of a registered sale deed dated 09.04.1965. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Katihar is directed to forthwith take action in respect of the property of the petitioner in accordance with law after communication of this order to him.

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.10813 of 2021 dt.05-02-2026 4/4

¶29

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶30

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶31

Sanjay/-

¶32

AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 13.02.2026 Transmission Date NA

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Khalilur Rahman Son of Late Safar Mahummad, Resident of village- Ganjan, P.o.- Barsoiand, District- Katihar¶¶3
Binay Kumar
respondent
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (Respondent No.1)¶¶7
Raj Kishore Roy
respondent
The Home Commissioner, Government of Bihar, Patna (Respondent No.2)¶¶7
respondent
The District Magistrate, Katihar (Respondent No.3)¶¶7
respondent
The Superintendent of Police, Katihar (Respondent No.4)¶¶7
respondent
The Sub Divisional Officer, Barsoi, Katihar (Respondent No.5)¶¶7
respondent
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Barsoi, Katihar (Respondent No.6)¶¶7
respondent
The Circle Officer, Barsoi, District- Katihar (Respondent No.7)¶¶7
respondent
The S.H.O., Barsoi, Katihar (Respondent No.8)¶¶7
respondent
Md. Sakur Son of Chainuddin (Respondent No.9)¶¶7
respondent
Muhmmad Majo Son of Chainuddin (Respondent No.10)¶¶7
respondent
Latif Son of Chainuddin (Respondent No.11)¶¶7
respondent
Samsul Haque Son of Chainuddin (Respondent No.12)¶¶7
respondent
Jamshed Ali Son of Jumar Ali (Respondent No.13)¶¶7
respondent
Md. Haroon Son of Jumar Ali (Respondent No.14)¶¶7
respondent
Jahrul Son of Jumar Ali (Respondent No.15)¶¶7
respondent
Md. Jamiruddin Son of Namiruddin (Respondent No.16)¶¶7
respondent
Md. Samrul Son of Namiruddin (Respondent No.17)¶¶7
respondent
Jer Mahamad Son of Namiruddin (Respondent No.18)¶¶7
respondent
Mohbud Son of Gayasuddin (Respondent No.19)¶¶7
respondent
Abba Son of Gayasuddin (Respondent No.20)¶¶7
respondent
Anwara Khatun Wife of Md. Sakur (Respondent No.21)¶¶7
respondent
Saleka Khatun Wife of Jamshed Ali (Respondent No.22)¶¶7
respondent
Sarbanoo Khatun Wife of Haroon (Respondent No.23)¶¶7
respondent
Raijina Khatun Wife of Latif (Respondent No.24)¶¶7
respondent
Saleka Khatun Wife of Muhammad Majo (Respondent No.25)¶¶7
respondent
Muhmmad Rahim Son of Basiruddin (Respondent No.26)¶¶7
respondent
Sukojan Wife of Md. Rahim (Respondent No.27)¶¶7

Coram

AI extract

Purnendu Singhauthor¶¶14

Khalilur Rahman v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khalilur Rahman v. The State of Bihar

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

Shashi Kumar @ Shashi Bhushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vivek Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Janul Haque @ Md. Jainul Haque Vs The State of Bihar

Nand Kishore Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shatrudhan Ram @ Shatrudhan Prasad, Vs The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary