1 2026:CGHC:20803 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1804 of 2026 1 - Mrs. Panchmati Khute W/o. Nanhu Ram Khunte Aged About 58 Years Occupation- House Wife. 2 - Nanhu Ram Khunte S/o. Late Tudgu Khunte Aged About 63 Years Occupation- Retired From S.I.C.L. Katghora/korba, R/o. Village Jejra, Tahsil Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.). 2 - The Collector Korba District- Korba (C.G.). 3 - Bed Singh Kanwar S/o. Righghu Singh Kanwar Aged About 63 Years R/o. Bijhara, Tahsil- Podi-Uprada, District- Korba (C.G.). 4 - Ajit Kanwar W/o. Bed Singh Kanwar Aged About 35 Years R/o. Bijhara, Tahsil - Podi-Uprada, District- Korba (C.G.). 5 - Sunil Kanwar S/o. Bed Singh Aged About 33 Years R/o. Bijhara, Tahsil - Podi-Uprada, District- Korba (C.G.). RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 6 - Suresh Porte S/o. Raghunandan Singh Porte Aged About 55 Years Occupation- Politics R/o. Bijhara, Tahsil - Podi-Uprada, District- Korba (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Verma, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 05/05/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or appropriate writ direct the respondent no. 01 & 02 to do every thing required to bring peaceful life to the petitioners & to remove fear of the 06 respondents No. 03 to 06 from heart & brain of petitioners. 10.2 That, to further may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to control & punish the respondent No. 03 to 06 direct them to give Rs. one cror to the petitioners. And further direct to respondent no. 1 & 2 to pay Rs. one Cror to the petitioner within one month from the date of order and they can recover it from respondent no. 03 to 06. 10.3 Further may kindly be pleased to issue any writ, 3 order or direction which deem fit in the favour of the petitioner.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioners are the recorded owners and in possession of land bearing Khasra Nos. 223/1 and 223/2, admeasuring 0.1908 hectare and 0.364 hectare respectively, situated at Village Binjhara, Tahsil Podi-Uproda, District Korba (C.G.), duly entered in the name of petitioner No. 1 in the revenue records; that adjoining land bearing Khasra No. 222 belongs to respondent No. 1, Umendra Singh; that respondent No. 1 along with other respondents, namely Bed Singh and Umendra Singh, have illegally encroached upon the aforesaid land of the petitioners; that in order to assert their rights, petitioner No. 1 had instituted a civil suit for declaration of title and possession being Civil Suit No. A/15/2018 against the said respondents, which has been decreed in favour of the petitioners vide judgment and decree dated 05.02.2024 that prior to the decree, demarcation of the land was carried out on 27.12.2023, and a panchnama was prepared, following which the Revenue Inspector submitted a report to the Tahsildar, who in turn forwarded the same to the SDO (Revenue), Podi-Uproda, vide memo dated 19.01.2024 that despite the decree and demarcation, the respondents have continued to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioners, leading to preventive proceedings being initiated by the police under Sections 126(2) and 135(3) of the BNSS (Istagasa No. 90/2025, Annexure P/3); 4 that petitioner No. 2 has also lodged an FIR on 19.03.2026 against the respondents at Police Station Katghora that it is further alleged that respondents No. 3 to 6 have extended threats to the life of the petitioners and have even engaged habitual offenders to intimidate them, creating a constant atmosphere of fear and insecurity; that the petitioners, particularly petitioner No. 1, who is a paralysed woman, and petitioner No. 2, a retired person (retired on 30.06.2021) are vulnerable and unable to withstand such intimidation; that the husband of the village Sarpanch has also allegedly threatened the petitioners to vacate the land and leave the village; that the respondents have even dismantled the boundary wall of the petitioners’ land, further aggravating the dispute; and that in these circumstances, the petitioners’ right to peaceful possession, safety, and dignity is being continuously violated, compelling them to approach this Court. 3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, on account of the persistent threats extended by respondents No. 3 to 6, the petitioners are living under constant fear and insecurity and are facing serious hardship due to the illegal acts committed by the said respondents; it is further submitted that the dispute has its genesis in a civil matter wherein a decree has already been passed in favour of the petitioners in respect of the disputed land, and despite such adjudication, respondents No. 3 to 6 are continuously harassing the petitioners in various ways; it is 5 contended that complaints have been lodged before the concerned police station, however, no effective action has been taken against the said respondents till date; it is also submitted that although an Istgasa has been registered, no substantial steps have been taken thereafter and the matter remains pending under investigation, thereby leaving the petitioners without any effective protection. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the same. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and in view of the fact that an FIR has already been lodged on 19.03.2026, the concerned police authorities are directed to take necessary and appropriate action on the basis of the said FIR strictly in accordance with law; it is further directed that, in the event the petitioners submit any additional complaint or report against the said respondents, the concerned police shall be under a legal obligation to consider the same and take prompt and appropriate action in accordance with law. 7. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat