2025:JHHC:12836 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(Cr.) No. 691 of 2023 With I.A. No. 5474 of 2024 Nageshwar Mahto, son of late Sawna Mahto, resident of village Rajadera (Supa Toli), P.O Rajadera, P.S. Angara, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand. … Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Jharkhand, Ranchi. 2. The Director General-cum-Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand. 3. The Inspector General of Police, Ranchi Zone, Doranda, Ranchi. 4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, South Chhotanagpur Range, Kutchery Chowk, Kotwali, Ranchi. 5. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, Kutchery Road, Kotwali, Ranchi. 6. The Superintendent of Police, Rural, Ranchi at Collectroate Building, Kutchery Road, Kotwali, Ranchi. 7. The Officer-In-Charge, Namkum Police Station, Namkum, Ranchi. ... Respondents. ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the petitioner(s): Mr. Sameer Saurabh, Advocate. For the State: Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, AC to Sr. SC-II ------- I.A. No. 5474 of 2024 11/29.04.2025: The petitioner knowing full well has not impleaded the persons, who allegedly have dispossessed the petitioner from his land. The petitioner has now filed this interlocutory application praying therein to implead the accused, namely, Manish Rahi, son of Baldeo Rahi, Md. Kashim Khan, son of late Saukat Ali and Saiyad Md. Kalim, son of Saiyad Abdul Mutalib, as party respondents in the cause title of this petition. The prayer is allowed. Let necessary correction be made in the cause title of this petition in red ink, accordingly, within two days. Accordingly, this application is allowed. W.P(Cr.) No. 691 of 2023 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- (a) For direction upon the respondent No. 1 to constitute a Special Investigation Team for investigation of Namkum P.S. Case No. 458 of 2022 as the respondent No. 5 to 7 are not taking appropriate action against the accused persons and the respondent No. 7 with intention to help the accused persons instituted the FIR for minor offence, pending in the Court of learned J.M. Ranchi. (b) For direction upon the respondents to remove the accused persons from the house and land of the petitioner and possession of the same be handed over to the petitioner as he has been forcibly dispossessed from his house and land by the accused persons. 3. So far as prayer No. 1 is concerned, it has been submitted by the petitioner that the police has submitted the final form arriving at a conclusion that the case is civil in nature. The informant i.e. the petitioner filed a protest and on protest, the cognizance has already been taken by the Court. 4. Since the cognizance has already been taken by the Court, the first prayer made in the writ petition is rendered infructuous. 5. So far as second prayer is concerned, the petitioner has prayed for restoration of the landed property in his favour as it is his case that the accused persons, against whom the cognizance has been taken, have forcibly occupied the land of the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is violation of Article 300A of the Constitution, thus this writ petition is maintainable. 6. It is the case of the petitioner that newly added private respondents have dispossessed the petitioner. It is not a case that the Government Agency has dispossessed the petitioner. Only to establish jurisdiction, it has been submitted that in presence of the police, the private respondents have dispossessed the petitioner. 7. In fact, this is a case where the petitioner has to approach the Civil Court for declaring his right, title and pray for recovery of possession over the property in question. Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the relief(s), as prayed for by the petitioner in this criminal writ petition, cannot be granted. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Anu/Cp2. (ANANDA SEN, J.)