IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1145 of 2010 SHYAM SUNDAR GUPTA SON OF LATE KARU SHAW RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.S. BHADOUR, DISTRICT PATNA. AT PRESENT RESIDING AT 115, HEM CHANDRA NASKAR ROAD, P.S. BELEGHATA, KOLKATTA – 700010. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE HOME SECRETARY, GOVT; OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE D.G.P. BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), PATNA 4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BARH, PATNA 5. THE THANA-IN-CHARGE, BHADOUR POLICE STATION BHADOUR, BARH, PATNA 6. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, VIGILANCE KEPT. GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 7. SURENDRA KUMAR GUPTA. 8. NAGENDRA KUMAR GUPTA BOTH RESPONDENTS NO. 7 AND 8 ARE SONS OF LATE RAM LAKHAN SHAW AND BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.S. BHADOUR, DISTRICT PATNA AND AT PRESENT P.S. BELEGHATA, KOLKATTA 700010 9. BALBHADRA SINGH, SON OF MAHESHA SINGH. 10. PUNJABI SINGH SON OF SUBELAL SINGH. 11. GHANTU SINGH SON OF CHHOTAN SINGH ALL THE THREE RESPONDENTS NO. 9 TO 11 ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DURBEY,P.S. BHADOUR, DISTRICT PATNA. 12. BHUBNESHAR YADAV SON OF RAMJI YADAV 13. GANESH YADAV SON OF CHARITTAR YADAV BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JALMALCHAK, P.S. BHADOUR , DISTRICT PATNA. ----------- 02. 23.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State as also the respondent nos. 7 and 8. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 7 and 8 and a reply has been filed on behalf of the petitioner. The prayer of the petitioner is that respondent nos. 2 and 4 be directed to instruct the respondent no. 5 to register the first information report against the private respondents who have forcefully entered upon the land in question cultivating the same. The aforesaid land measuring about 110 bighas is in a peaceful possession of the petitioner by virtue of decree of the Civil Court through an arbitration proceeding. However, the private respondents very often attempt to cultivate the land in question forcefully and thereby any untoward incident may happen between the parties. Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 7 and 8 submits that the claim of the petitioner that they are entitled to cultivate the land by virtue of the decree pursuant to the arbitration proceeding till the year 2016 is absolutely incorrect. As a matter of fact, they have no right to cultivate the land. Considering the rival submission of the parties, in my opinion with respect to their civil dispute the matter cannot be properly looked into in a writ proceeding. However, if the petitioner apprehends any untoward incident at the instance of the private respondents it goes without saying that it is always open to him to bring it to the notice of the concerned officer in- charge/Superintendent of Police the relevant information constituting any offence. In case such information is brought to the notice of the aforesaid authorities, the same be looked into and necessary action may be taken in accordance with law. It is made clear that this court has not gone into the merits of the rival claim of the parties. The application is disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)