IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ No.1189 of 2012

======================================================

Binod Prasad Sahu son of late Firangi Sahu, resident of House No.328,

Mohalla-Sant Tola (Jori Pokhar). Ward No.2, P.S.-Haveli Kharagpur,

District-Munger.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.The State of Bihar

2.The Inspector General of Police, Patna, Bihar

3.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Patna, Bihar

4.The Superintendent of Police, Munger

5.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Munger

6.The Officer-in-Charge Police Station- Haveli Kharagpur, Munger

7.The District Magistrate, Munger

8.Sujata Sah W/o Badal Sah, resident of Village- Paria Bariarpur

(Pustakalaya Road Paria), P.S.-Bariarpur, District-Munger at present

residing at Mohalla-Sant Tola (Jori Pokhar), P.S.-Haveli Kharagpur,

District-Munger.

.... .... Respondent/s

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH

ORAL ORDER

2

17-12-2012

In the present writ petition the prayer has been made

to direct the respondents to restore possession of the house of the

petitioner in favour of the petitioner from which he along with his

family has illegally been evicted by using force without following

any process of law at the instance of respondent no.8 in collusion

with respondent nos.5 and 6. The further prayer is for a direction

to be issued against the respondents to adequately compensate the

petitioner for his illegal eviction from his own residential premises

and for the damage of his belongings and valuable and for the loss

of his prestige in the society due to aforesaid illegality committed

by the respondents.

From perusal of annexure-5, which is a report of the

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1189 of 2012 (2) dt.17-12-2012

2

Superintendent of Police, Munger, it appears that there is dispute

between the petitioner and his agnates with respect to the house in

question. It is well settled that in the writ jurisdiction the court

would not decide the disputed questions of fact. The questions of

right, title and possession of a property are to be determined in a

properly instituted suit by adducing evidence in court. Such rights

cannot be determined in extraordinary writ jurisdiction under

Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

In that view of the matter, I find no merit in the

present writ petition. It is dismissed, accordingly.

Md.S./-

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)