2026:JHHC:8739 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 1929 of 2026 ------ 1. Roshan Jha aged about 46 son of Kusheshwar Jha 2. Rekha Jha aged about 45 years wife of Roshan Jha Both R/o Flat No. 302, A-Block, Loknath Regency, Hesag, Hatia, P.O Hatia P.S Jagarnathpur, District -Ranchi … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi having its office situated at BLOCK-A, D.C. OFFICE, Kutchery chowk, P.O G.P.O and P.S Kotwali, District Ranchi (Jharkhand) 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Ranchi having its office situated at BLOCK-A, DC OFFICE, Kutchery chowk, P.O G.P.O and P.S Kotwali, District Ranchi, (Jharkhand) 4. The Ranchi Municipal Corporation through its Municipal Commissioner, having its office situated at Kotwali, Kutchery chowk, P.O G.P.O and P.S District - Ranchi (Jharkhand) 5. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi having its office at Kutchery Chowk, Deputy Para, Ahirtoli, P.O G.P.O and P.S Kotwali, District Ranchi, (Jharkhand) 834001 6. The Officer-in-Charge, Jagarnathpur Police Station, having its office Jagarnathpur Police Station, P.O Dhurwa P.S Jagarnthpur, District Ranchi (Jharkhand) 7. Madan Mohan Jaiswal Son of late Shyam Lal Jaiswal R/o Flat No. 303 A Block Loknath Regency, Hesag, Hatia, P.O Hatia P.S Jagarnathpur, District - Ranchi (Jharkhand) 8. Anil Danial Son of Late M.K Kujur R/o Flat no. 404 B Block Loknath Regency, Hesag, Hatia, PO Hatia PS Jagarnathpur, District - Ranchi (Jharkhand) 9. D.K Sahi son of not known to the petitioners R/o Flat No. 201 Loknath Regency, Hesag, Hatia, PO Hatia PS- Jagarnathpur, District - Ranchi (Jharkhand) 10. K.K Ray Son of Not known to the petitioner R/o Flat no. 303, B Block Loknath Regency, Hesag, Hatia, P.O Hatia P.S Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi, Jharkhand 11. Pankaj Kumar Son of Not Known to the petitioner R/o 201 B Block Loknath Regency, Hesag, Hatia, P.O Hatia P.S Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi Jharkhand 12. Rajesh Kumar S/o Not known to the compliant R/o Flat No. 402, B Block, Resident of Loknath Regency, Hesag, P.O Hatia and P.S Jagarnathpur, District -Ranchi (Jharkhand). … … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suraj Kishore Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar, GA-III Mr. Prashant Kr. Singh, Advocate ------ 02/ 26th March, 2026 2026:JHHC:8739 2 1. Heard the parties. 2. The petitioners has filed this writ petition, for the following reliefs:- .” i. For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction, preferably in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Respondent Authorities to forthwith take all necessary steps for restoration of uninterrupted water supply to the residential premises of the Petitioners, being Flat No. 302, A-Block, Loknath Residency, Hesag, Hatia, Ranchi, which has been illegally disconnected by the Private Respondents, in order to protect and enforce the Petitioner's fundamental right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India;. AND/OR (ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/direction(s) particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the Respondent Police Authorities to provide necessary police protection to the Petitioner and/or any technical personnel engaged for the purposes of restoration of the water supply connection to the Petitioner's premises. And/Or (iii) For further issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/ direction(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice for doing conscionable justice to the petitioners. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the private respondents have damaged the water pipeline of these petitioners deliberately and they are not allowing the petitioners to repair the same. He further submits that the Police is also not registering the complaint and the authorities are also not cooperating with the petitioners. 4. On the aforesaid grievance, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing an application under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying directions upon the authorities. 5. After going through the petition, I find that the petitioners have an appropriate remedy in Section 163 of the BNSS, 2023. Section 163 of the BNSS, 2023 provides that in cases, in the opinion of the District Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate, if there is sufficient ground for proceeding under this Section and immediate prevention or speedy remedy is desirable, such Magistrate may, by a written order direct any person to abstain from a certain act or to take certain order in respect of certain property, in his possession or under his Management. It is 2026:JHHC:8739 3 necessary to quote Section 163, BNSS, 2023, which is as under:- “163. Power to issue order in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger. (1) In cases where, in the opinion of a District Magistrate, a Sub-divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government in this behalf, there is sufficient ground for proceeding under this section and immediate prevention or speedy remedy is desirable, such Magistrate may, by a written order stating the material facts of the case and served in the manner provided by section 153, direct any person to abstain from a certain act or to take certain order with respect to certain property in his possession or under his management, if such Magistrate considers that such direction is likely to prevent, or tends to prevent, obstruction, annoyance or injury to any person lawfully employed, or danger to human life, health or safety or a disturbance of the public tranquillity, or a riot, or an affray. (2) An order under this section may, in cases of emergency or in cases where the circumstances do not admit of the serving in due time of a notice upon the person against whom the order is directed, be passed ex parte. (3) An order under this section may be directed to a particular individual, or to persons residing in a particular place or area, or to the public generally when frequenting or visiting a particular place or area. (4) …………….. (5) ……………… (6) ……………… (7) ……………..” 6. Thus, in view of the aforesaid provision, I find that the SDO has got power to restrain any of the private respondents who is trying to create mischief. Thus, I direct the petitioners to approach the concerned SDO, by filing an appropriate application. 7. With the aforesaid observation, thus this writ petition is disposed of. 8. If such application is filed, the SDO will consider the urgency of the matter as this relates to repair of the water-pipeline of the petitioners and will take up the matter on urgent basis. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 26.03.2026 S.K.D/CP-2 Uploaded on 30.03.2026