IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.780 of 2008 MUNNA YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 5. 08.09.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. While the writ application pleads that the petitioner has been externed out of his own self constructed house by Respondent no. 8 in collusion with the local Police and, therefore, he is entitled not only to be restored possession but that action should be taken against the erring Officer, his own document at Annexure-6 to the writ petition addressed to the Superintendent of Police, West Champaran, Bettiah dated 2.6.2008 states that when he was dispossessed by the private Respondent, the administration remained a mute spectator and despite his Sanha in the Court of S.D.M., the Respondent administration was not doing justice to him. Therefore, from the documents annexed to the writ petition by the writ petitioner himself, there has been no dispossession by the State or its authorities much less in collusion with them. Additionally, the representation of the petitioner appears to have been acted upon when a report has been submitted by the Assistant Sub-Inspector, Bettiah Muffasil Police Station that the dispute between the petitioner and Respondent no. 8 appears to be 20-25 years old. There is no occasion for this court to grant any relief to the petitioner in exercise of its Criminal writ Jurisdiction. 2 The writ petition is disposed with an observation that if so advised, the petitioner may pursue his remedy before the appropriate forum. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)