Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

1. Heard Mr. B.D. Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. H.K. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the respondents. Though the prayer made in the writ petition has undergone change during the pendency of the writ petition before this Court, at the time of final hearing, Mr. Das, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to payment of compensation only.

2. A brief recital of the facts would be in order. Originally, the writ petition was filed with the following prayer:-

"In the premises aforesaid, it is most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit this application, call for the records and issue a rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the petitioner shall not be provided with all the items taken by the officials of the respondent No. 2 and 3 as mentioned in his representation dated 23.02.2012 addressed to the respondent No. 2 with copy to the concerned person (at Annexure-9) immediately and why the non-bailable warrant of arrest against Havildar Sandeep Thapa shall not be executed immediately as per the order dated 05.01.2012 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat in Jorhat PS Case No. 922/11 and why the respondent No. 2 and 3 shall not be directed to direct Havildar Sandeep Thapa to appear before the Officer-in-Charge, Jorhat PS in connection with the Jorhat PS Case No. 922/11 and why the investigation of the Jorhat PS Case No. 922/11 shall not be completed immediately and why compensation of Rs. 10.00 lakhs shall not be provided to the petitioner for their illegal entry to the petitioner's house at 1.00 am on 22.12.11 and taking away various items by forcefully breaking the locks of the petitioner's steel almirah and after return of the Rule and upon such cause or causes being shown and upon hearing the parties be pleased to make the Rule absolute giving full and complete relief to the petitioner and/or pass such further or other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper."

3. A. The above prayer was made in the context of the grievance expressed by the petitioner in the writ petition.

3. According to the petitioner, he is a contractor and has been executing contractual works in Military Engineering Services, besides in other establishments. On 20.12.2011, he was at Guwahati in connection with his business works. Be it stated that residence of the petitioner is at Rowriah Tiniali near Jorhat town in the district of Jorhat. On 21.12.2011 at about 01.00 am, some army personnel came from Dimapur in three vehicles, one Indica Car and two Maruti Gypsies and forcibly entered into his house at Rowriah Tiniali. They were in army uniform carrying weapons. One lady officer was there in the group comprising of 7/8 personnel. At that time, his wife, two sons (aged about 21 and 18 years) and daughter (aged about 12 years) were present at home. It is stated that the army personnel had covered the eyes of the inmates and took away the following :-

(i) Cash amounting to Rs. 1.5 lakhs;

(ii) Gold ornaments worth Rs. 6.5 lakhs;

(iii) One laptop;

(iv) One .32 pistol having valid licence;

(v) Four numbers of Mobile handsets with SIM cards;

(vi) Passport, Driving Licence, PAN Card, one cheque book of Indian Bank, five copies of photograph with Chief Minister and local MLA, LICI Gold Club Membership Card etc.

4. Petitioner lodged first information before the Officer In-charge of Rowriah Police Station on 21.12.2011; on the basis of which Jorhat PS Case No. 922/11, under Sections 395/397 IPC was registered.

5. On 30.12.2011, police had informed the petitioner over telephone regarding handing over of some of the items by military personnel. By order dated 25.01.2012, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat granted temporary zimma of the articles on execution of bond.

6. According to the petitioner, the cash amount and the jewellery were not returned; so also th