SAJAHAN SK @ SEKH SAJAHAN v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
WPA/22954/2026 · 2026-09-14
Saugata Bhattacharyya
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 40351 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 40351 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
25 1144..0099..22002266 Ct. No. 05
adeb
WPA 22954 of 2026
Sajahan Sk. @ Sekh Sajahan Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Nikhil Kumar Gupta
…for the petitioner
Mr. Anirban Das
Ms. Renesa Dey
…for the State
Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mandal
Ms. Sayantan Rakshit
…for the respondent nos. 9 & 10
1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of petitioner is taken on record.
2. By filing this writ petition precisely petitioner has prayed for implementation of order dated 12th April, 2023 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Suri Birbhum. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner is in possession of land in question. Therefore, prayer is made for directing concerned police authorities to take steps which would permit the petitioner to have peaceful possession over the land in question. It is alleged that private respondents are disturbing peaceful possession of the land of the petitioner.
2
3. Learned advocate representing respondent nos. 9 and 10 disputes such submissions and it is further submitted that respondent nos. 9 and 10 are in possession of the land in question.
4. State respondents are represented by learned advocate.
5. Be that as it may, it appears that petitioner as well as respondent nos. 9 and 10 are claiming possession over the land in question. If petitioner finds that in spite of order passed on 12th April, 2023 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Suri, Birbhum on Misc. Appeal No. 29 of 2016 petitioner’s right in respect of land in question is being infringed in that event petitioner needs to approach appropriate civil forum for execution of judgment dated 12th April, 2023. Police authority is not the appropriate authority to decide inter se right of the parties over the land in question.
6. Hence, present writ petition is not interfered with and same stands dismissed.
7. However, this order shall not preclude the petitioner to approach Civil Court in pursuit of remedy.
3
8. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)