IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.684 of 2009 ALOK KUMAR son of Late Umanath Sharma, resident of 6 H-25, Bahadurpur Housing Colony, Bhootnath Road, Police Station- Agamkuan, Distt.- Patna. . . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 2. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna. 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Patna City, Patna. 4. The Officer-in-charge, Agamkuan, Police station, District- Patna. 5. Basanti Srivastava, w/o Late Arun Kr. Srivastava, r/o Gokul Path, Patel Nagar, Police station Patliputra and Distt.- Patna. . . . . . Respondents. For the Petitioner: Mr. Manish Kumar No.-II, Advocate For the Res. No.5: Mr. Y.V. Giri, Senior Advocate Mr. V.R. Bharti, Advocate For the State : Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan, AC to G.P.22 ----------- 4/ 26.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State as well as respondent no.5. In the instant writ application, the petitioner has prayed for direction to respondent no.2 to provide security and for proper investigation of Agamkuan P.S. case no. 151 of 2009. As final report has been submitted in Agamkuan P.S. case no. 151 of 2009, the petitioner does not press his prayer no.2. The petitioner submits that he is a tenant in the premises of respondent no.5. He further submits that he fears threat from respondent no.5 and her muscle men time and again interfered with the running of the school, as such he prays for providing security. He further submits that on earlier occasion people of respondent no.5 had committed assault also, for which he had filed Agamkuan P.S. case no. 151 of 2009. Mr. Giri, learned Senior counsel, appearing for the respondent no.5 submits that the petitioner had taken the premises on lease which had already expired long back. Learned counsel 2 further submits that she has also filed eviction suit bearing Eviction suit no. 1 of 2010. Learned counsel further submits that in fact it is the petitioner’s side, who had assaulted her people, for which Agamkuan P.S. case no. 152 of 2009 has been instituted, in which charge-sheet has been submitted and cognizance has also been taken. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has stated in paragraph 20 of the petitioner that he is ready to vacate the premises. Heard counsel for the parties. It is not in dispute that petitioner took the premises in question on rent from respondent no.5, who has already filed Eviction Suit no. 1 of 2010, as the lease has expired. Both sides have alleged assault by each other. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to pass any positive order in this case. However, it will be open for the petitioner to take remedy available under law. It will also be open for the petitioner to pursue his representation before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, who would look into it. With the aforesaid observation, this application is disposed of. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)