IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.654 of 2010 1. ASHUTOSH SINGH @ ASHUTOSH SON OF SHRI KRISHNA GOPALPURI 2. GUGUN SINGH SON OF SRI TUNTUN SINGH 3. MRITUNJAY KUMAR ALIAS PAPPU SINGH, SON OF KRISHNA GOPALPURI, ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BHANDAJOR, P.O. KOSHI, P.S. ROH, DISTRICT- NAWADAH Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE HOME SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NAWADAH 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PLICE, NAWADAH 6. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RAJAULI, DISTRICT- NAWADAH 7. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NARHAT P.S. DISTRICT- NAWADAH 8. ADITYA SINGH, SON OF LATE DIRIK SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE/P.S. NARHAT, DISTRICT- NAWADAH ----------- 3 03.02.2011 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the State. The prayer of the petitioners is that he is apprehending hindrance, illegal threats, and obstructions in carrying out his evocation on the part of the respondent no.8 since petitioners refused to pay the extortion money alleged to have been demanded by the respondent no.8 for running his business of brick kiln over the land in question. According to the petitioners, there is absolutely no claim of the respondent no.8 over the land in question, however, still he claims the same as well as demands the extortion money. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have brought it to the notice of the police officials by way of filing representation, however the same has not been considered/attended to, and as such, the respondents deserve to be directed to protect the petitioner from the illegal acts of the respondent no.8. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the allegation against the respondent no.8 constitutes a cognizable offence, but, it does not appear that the petitioners have lodged any First Information Report or has filed any complaint before the Magistrate as provided under the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Considering the submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to interfere into the matter. However, it will be open for the petitioner to take appropriate steps as permissible under the law with regard to the alleged demand of extortion money by the respondent no.8 from the petitioners. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the claim of the parties. The writ application accordingly stands disposed. Manish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)