##PAGE1##

20

23.12.2025

Ct. No.5

b.das

WPA 27016 of 2025

Arpita Pal Chandra

Vs.

The State of W. B. & Ors.

Mr. Somopriyo Chowdhury

Mr. Sourav Mondal

Mr. Swapnadwip Roy

Mr. Shaunak Ghosh …for the petitioner.

Mr. Supriya Chattopadhyay

Mr. Hare Krishna Halder …for the State.

Mr. Tanmoy Khan

Ms. Arpita Mondal

Ms. Richa Pramanik …for the private respondents.

Affidavit of service and supplementary affidavits filed

by the petitioner and report submitted by the State are

taken on record.

Heard learned counsels for the parties.

The petitioner submits that the private respondents

who are members of the local club are restraining the

petitioner from raising boundary wall in her property. They

are also threatening her and abusing her in filthy language.

The petitioner lodged a complaint before the police

authority which has been registered as FIR after the writ

petition was filed. Subsequently, two FIRs have been

lodged against the petitioner and her family members by

the private respondents and notice under Section 35(3) of

the BNSS were issued against them in this regard.

2

Learned counsel for the private respondents submits

that the vendor of the petitioner transferred a portion of the

land in question in favour of the club. The land is

undivided and requires to be demarcated.

Learned counsel for the State submits that a notice

has been issued upon the petitioner by the Olipur-

Kashipur gram panchayat alleging unauthorized

construction of boundary wall in the property. The dispute

is purely civil in nature.

It appears that investigation with regard to the

complaint lodged by the petitioner as well as to other

subsequent complaints lodged by the private respondents

is pending.

The investigating officer shall conduct a fair,

unbiased and impartial investigation and take the same to

its logical conclusion in accordance with law.

No coercive steps be taken against the petitioner and

her family members (accused in the two complaints) in

connection with the two complaints lodged against them

subject to their co operating in investigation.

The dispute with regard to raising of boundary wall is

essentially is civil in nature.

The petitioner is at liberty to approach the

appropriate civil forum for redressal of her grievance.

In the meantime, the police authority shall maintain

strict surveillance in the area in order to avoid any

untoward incident due to the strained relationship between

3

the parties. The police shall also ensure maintenance of

peace and tranquility in the area.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained

in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted.

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied

for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all

requisite formalities.

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)