IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC NO.346 OF 2007 KULSUM BEGUM VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 5 13.8.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional public prosecutor for the State of Bihar. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner prays for commanding the respondent authorities to ensure protection to the life and property of the petitioner, particularly in matter of cultivation and harvesting of crops standing in the land mentioned in representation dated 7.9.2005 contained in annexure 3. Case of the petitioner is that the land contained in annexure 3 was auction purchased by her father, namely, Md Mumtaj Alam Khan. The auction purchase was challenged in a suit, which ultimately was decreed in favour of Mumtaj Alam Khan vide judgment and decree dated 6th September, 1965, in Second Appeal no. 456 of 1963. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some strangers to the family, namely, Anish Khan, Ayub Khan and their associates who have no right in the land in question, are causing hindrance in peaceful enjoyment of the property. Learned counsel states that petitioner has filed a partition suit bearing title suit no. 467 of 2002, which also includes land mentioned in annexure 3 in which only other co sharers are party. The aforesaid trouble shooters are not parties to suit. He further submits that in fact the land which is the subject matter of partition suit no. 467 of 2002 is the exclusive property of father of writ petitioner. Other descendants claiming through 2 her father may have some interest, but persons who are strangers to the family have no right. Petitioner further submits that she being daughter of late Mumtaz Alam Khan who had valid decree of this court over the land in question cannot be pre-empted by strangers. The right of a citizen to enjoy his property unfettered by interference, except in accordance with law is well recognized. Relying upon decision of the Apex court in case of P R Murlidharan and others, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 501 this court in Cr.W.JC No. 192 of 2008 ( Paspat Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and others), disposed of on.20.5.2008 has observed that a person has right to police protection if there is threat to his life and liberty or for protection of right declared by a decree or order passed by a Civil Court. In aforesaid backdrop, the petitioner is entitled to enjoyment of his property of which he has exclusive possession vis-a- vis other co sharers, and strangers/outsiders have no right to interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of the land in question. Thus, the petitioner should be provided all possible protection by the District Administration in respect of deployment of police force for cultivation of his land. If the petitioner files an application in this respect, the respondent authorities will take all steps to ensure peaceful cultivation and harvesting of the crops standing on the land scheduled in annexure 3. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. Shashi. (S.P.Singh,J).