25.04.2025 Court No. 2 Item No. 54 AGM Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Jurisdiction WPA 369 of 2025 Baharul Islam Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sanjib Kumar Mukhopadhyay. V.C. Ms. Madhushri Dutta. ……for the petitioner. Ms. Bedashruti Bose. Mr. Sandip Guha Roy. … For the State. Mr. Joydeep Kanta Bhowmik. Mr. Subham Kumar. Ms. Priti Das. … For the respondent nos. 8 and 9. 1. The petitioner alleges fraud against his father-in-law, the respondent no. 8, who is the Ex Upa Pradhan, Banarhat-I Gram Panchayat. 2. Specific allegation of the petitioner is that the respondent no. 8 who is the father of the respondent no. 9 has managed to squeeze out money from the State authority by using the job card issued in favour of his wife, i.e. the respondent no. 9 by mentioning the period during which she gave birth to her child. 3. From the report of the Inspector-in- charge, Banarhat Police Station dated 18th February, 2025, it appears that an enquiry was conducted in response to the complaint lodged by the petitioner and the job card in favour of the respondent no. 9 was confirmed. 2 4. From the documents annexed to the writ petition it appears that the respondent no. 9 was provided work on 31st December, 2019 and she worked till 15th January, 2020. 5. The petitioner has averred in the writ petition that the child was born on 20th November, 2019 by way of normal delivery. 6. Learned advocate representing the private respondents submits, upon instruction that, the respondent no. 9 has been deserted by the petitioner/husband and for the purpose of survival she is required to go out to work. 7. Upon hearing the parties, it appears that there is a matrimonial dispute pending between the petitioner/husband and the respondent no. 9/ wife. The petitioner has several allegations and accusations against his father-in-law and his wife. The dispute between the parties is absolutely private in nature with no public element involved in it. 8. It will be open for the petitioner to approach the competent forum for remedy. The police or the Panchayat authority will not be the appropriate body to provide any relief in the instant case. 9. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible. (Amrita Sinha, J.) 3