14. 14. 15.09.2026 (D/L) (D/L) CT. NO. 05 CT. NO. 05 (ARPAN-A.R.CT.) In The High Court at Calcutta CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.A. 23084 OF 2026 MANOHARA SANA VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS …………… Mr. Sougata Mitra, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Kumar Gupta, Adv. Ms. Soma Chakraborty, Adv. Mr. Subhodeep Maitra, Adv. …For Petitioner Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Nripendra Pratap Singh, Adv. …For State Mr. Kaustav Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Ria Kundu, Adv. …For Private Respondents 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of petitioner is taken on record. 2. Learned advocate representing petitioner submits that previously a writ petition being WPA 6236 of 2023 was filed and same was disposed of vide order dated 25th February, 2025 wherein co-ordinate Bench observed that in case any order is passed by the Civil Court police authority would respect, obey and implement said order. 3. According to petitioner, in Title Suit no.406 of 2025, which was instituted by her, an ad interim order of injunction was passed on 4th December, 2025 thereby restraining defendants from disturbing possession of plaintiff over the suit property as well as from changing nature and character of the suit property for a limited period. It is submitted that subsequently ad interim order of injunction dated 4th December, 2025 was extended from time to time and it is still subsisting. [2] 4. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that order passed by the Civil Court on 4th December, 2025 needs to be complied with in view of the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench on the writ petition on 25th February, 2025. 5. State respondents and private respondents are represented by learned advocates who have opposed this writ petition on the count that vide ad interim order of injunction dated 4th December, 2025 Civil Court restrained defendants from disturbing peaceful possession of plaintiff over the suit property as well as from changing nature and character of the said property but there is no order passed by the Civil Court on 4th December, 2025 permitting plaintiff to raise boundary wall. 6. If petitioner finds that based on said ad interim order of injunction dated 4th December, 2025 passed by Civil Court petitioner can raise boundary wall and such right of the petitioner is denied, in that event, petitioner needs to approach Civil Court in pursuit of remedy within the statutory framework. Observations made by the co-ordinate Bench in order dated 25th February, 2025 passed on the previous writ petition being WPA 6236 of 2023 shall be applicable in the event right of the petitioner being plaintiff in Title Suit no.406 of 2025 is crystallized either at the interim stage or finally. 7. Hence, prayer of the petitioner for seeking direction upon concerned police authority which would facilitate petitioner to raise boundary wall, is refused. 8. However, such order shall not preclude petitioner to approach Civil Court in pursuit of remedy. [3] 9. If Civil Court is approached, order passed today on this writ petition shall not stand in the way in taking decision, in accordance with law. 10. Writ petition stands disposed of. 11. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court. (SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.)