IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.829 of 2008 RANJAN PRASAD SINHA son of Bhubneshwar Prasad Sinha, resident of village Jagdishpur, P.S. Jagdishpur, Dist. Bhagalpur, Presently residing at Mohalla Housing Board Colony, L.I.CG 178,Barari, P.S. Barari, Dist. Bhagalpur. ……Petitioner-Appellant. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Magistrate , Bhagalpur, 3. The Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur, 4. Mrs. Deoki Chatterji w/o Parnav Kumar Chatterji, 5. Parnav Kumar Chatterji, son of late Amrendra Nath Chatterji, 6. Devdoot Chatterji, son of Pravave Kumar Chatterji. Respondent no.4 to 6 all residents of Mohalla Masakchak, Radha-Rani Road, P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Bhagalpur ……Respondents. ----------- For the Appellant : Mr. D.K. Sinha, Sr. Advocate. For the Respondents: None ------ 5 15.4.2009 This appeal is directed against the order/judgement dated 16.5.2008 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 10670 of 2005 by which the learned Single Judge has held the application not maintainable and dismissed the same. The appellant has filed the aforesaid writ application for restoration of possession and for suitable compensation for the losses caused by the respondents. The appellant was inducted in a shop as a tenant by the respondent. It is case of the petitioner appellant that he was removed forcefully although the petitioner-appellant filed a title suit which was pending. After the forceful eviction the petitioner appellant has lodged a first information report against respondent nos.5 and 6 under section 461, 379, 427, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. We cannot go into the fact of the case where the law has - 2 - already set in motion by the petitioner appellant both in civil and criminal forum. If allegations are correct, petitioner is also free to file civil case for restoration of possession and decree, if he is advised. But writ petition is not maintainable against private respondent. We do not find any merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed. Rahman/ (J.B.Koshy, CJ) (Dr.Ravi Ranjan, J)