2025:JHHC:19374 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(Cr.) No.450 of 2025 ----- Deepali Mandal, wife of late Pashupati Nath Mandal, resident of village Pandra, PO Hehal, PS Pandra (OP), District Ranchi, Jharkhand … Petitioner(s). Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi 3.The Superintendent of Police (Rural), Ranchi 4.The Officer In-charge, Pandra OP, Ranchi 5.The Sub-Divisional Officer SDO, Ranchi 6.Ashish Kumar, Grandson of Jaipal Oraon, resident of village Pandra, Hehal, PS Pandra OP, District Ranchi 7.Munna Saw, son of late Lakhan Saw, resident of village Pandra, Panchsheel Nagar, PO Hehal, PS Pandra OP, Ranchi 8. Sunita Oraon, daughter of Jaipal oraon, R/o Pandra PO Hehal, PS Pandra OP, District Ranchi 9.Jaipal Oraon son of late Soma Oraon, resident of village Pandra, PO Hehal, PS Pandra OP, District Ranchi … Respondents. CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. Amrita Banerjee, AC to GP-I …...... 04 /16.07.2025: Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: (i) for issuance of appropriate direction upon the official respondents i.e. respondent no. 2 to 5 to conduct proper, impartial and transparent enquiry with respect to the unlawful act/conduct of respondent no. 06, 07, 08 and 09 towards the peaceful physical possession of the petitioner over the property situated within RS Plot No. 1080, khata no. 112, thana no. 149, village pandra, district Ranchi while considering the fact that despite right, title, interest and possession of the petitioner over the property by virtue of registered sale deed and order dated 14.09.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 3440 of 2022 by the Hon’ble Jharkhand Hgh Court respondent no. 6 to 9 are unlawfully interfering, creating nuisance, tying to encroach and giving threat, filing frivolous complaint so far the petitioner is concerned with respect to the property which legally belongs to the petitioner. (ii) the petitioner further prays for issuance of appropriate direction upon the official respondents to restrain respondent no. 06 to 09 from creating any nuisance/disturbance/attempting encroachment/ giving threatening in connection with the property which includes both landed and residential and legally belongs to the petitioner. 2025:JHHC:19374 2 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the actual owner of the land in question. The private respondent nos.6 to 9 are trying to dispossess the petitioner and interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner and trying to encroach the same after giving threatening. The entire fact clearly suggest that there is some doubt over the right, title, interest and possession over the land. The petitioner is praying for an injunction against the private respondent nos. 6 to 9. 4. The relief which the petitioner has sought for can only be granted in a civil suit. The petitioner can seek remedy by approaching the appropriate forum. 5. An application under Article 226 of Constitution of India is not an appropriate remedy. 6. Thus, this writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to approach appropriate forum. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/