2025:JHHC:11367 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(Cr.) No.106 of 2023 ------ Naresh Yadav, aged about 65 years, son of late Guna Mahto, resident of village Kachan Tola, Madhokhand, PO and PS Ramgarh, District Palamu, Jharkhand … … Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Divisional Forest Officer, Mediningar, Palamau, PO and PS Medininagar, District Palamau, Jharkhand … … Respondents ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vimlesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Ms. Sunita Kumari, AC to Sr. SC II ----- 12/ 15.04.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for the following reliefs: a. “For issuance of appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction(s) upon the Respondent No.2 for dropping the entire case which has been lodged by the Forest Department against the Petitioner whereby and whereunder, Raja Brijdeo Narayan Singh son of Brahmdeo Narayan Singh, Chainpur Raj (Jamindar) has already been settled to the Petitioner his land measuring an area 7.95 decimals appertaining to Khata No.33 Plot No.28 situated at Mouza-Dhawa on 21.09.1941 and an area 8.99 decimals appertaining to Khata No.83 Plot No.174, 219, 316 situated at Mouza-Kachan on 15.03.1942 which is also running in the record in the name of the Petitioner and Petitioner is also paying the rent regularly and got the receipts and is in possession of the above mentioned lands inspite of the Respondent No.2 again and again lodged the criminal case against the Petitioner alleging therein that the said area which has been settled to the Petitioner by the Jamindar, those lands come under forest land; b. For direction upon the respondent concerned for giving the compensation to the Petitioner for which he has been wrongly implicated by the Forest Department in several cases under the Forest Act; c. For direction upon the Respondent Concerned for not 2025:JHHC:11367 2 taking any coercive action in future against the Petitioner; AND/OR d. For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s) or direction(s) or Order(s) for doing conscionable justice to the Petitioner.” 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the land belongs to the petitioner but several cases have been registered by the Forest Department against him thus he wants those cases to be dropped. In paragraph no. 11 of the petition the petitioner has stated that the Forest Department had wrongly claimed the land and lodged Criminal cases against the petitioner being CP Case No. 104 of 2012, Complaint Case No. 1299 of 2016 and Complaint Case No. 1693 of 2017 in which cognizance has already been taken. Further notice has been issued to the petitioner for evicting him from the lands which he claims to be his. 4. From the pleadings of the parties and the prayer made, I find that there is serious dispute of title. The petitioner is claiming title over the said land but the Forest Department has given notice of eviction to the petitioner and also lodged a criminal case under the Forest Act against the petitioner for encroaching the said land. Since there is serious dispute of title, the petitioner is advised to approach Civil Court having appropriate jurisdiction claiming his right, title and interest over the said land. This Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is not appropriate efficacious forum for the petitioner for redressing the grievance of the petitioner. 5. So far as criminal cases is concerned, if the same is pending, the petitioner can take his defence and can show documents of title. 6. This writ petition is dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/