Form No. J (2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE PRESENT: THE HON’BLE JUSTICE RISHAD MEDORA W.P.A 26541 of 2025 ASIT BARAN CHAKRABORTY VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. For the Petitioner For the State :: Mr. Arup Kundu, Mr. Avinaba Dan .....Advocates : Mr. Srijib Chakraborty .....Advocate Heard on Judgment and Order on : : 23rd September, 2026 23rd September, 2026 Rishad Medora, J.: 1. The petitioner is represented. 2. The State/respondent is represented. 3. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner today is taken on record. 4. From a perusal of such affidavit of service, it appears that the respondent no.6 has not yet been served with a copy of this writ petition. 5. The learned advocate representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner, after his wife’s death, purchased a piece of land in W.P.A . 26541 of 2025 Saradapally Bhutgoria, Bankura and constructed a house on such land for residential purpose. 6. The learned advocate representing the petitioner further submits that the petitioner’s handicapped son, Tapas Chakraborty subsequently got married to a divorced lady, being the private respondent no.6, namely, Riya Neogi, and she started staying with them at the aforesaid house. 7. However, within a few months thereafter, the private respondent no.6 started torturing the petitioner as well as his handicapped son. 8. It is submitted that the petitioner and his handicapped son were threatened by the respondent no.6 as well as, inter alia, by a gentleman, namely, Barun Garai, who started spending time with the private respondent no.6 in a closed room in the aforesaid house. The respondent no.6 also initiated a criminal proceeding against the petitioner and his handicapped son. 9. In such circumstances, and out of compulsion, the petitioner and his handicapped son were compelled to leave the said house and started staying elsewhere. 10. The learned advocate representing the petitioner further submits that the respondent no.6 is demanding that the said house be transferred to the respondent no.6. The petitioner has other allegations and grievances against the respondent no.6. 11. In such circumstances, he has approached the State/respondent authorities seeking their intervention and assistance to help him live peacefully and get back possession of his house. W.P.A . 26541 of 2025 12. The petitioner submits that the petitioner and his handicapped son need to be protected from the respondent no.6 and prays for an order in this regard. 13. The learned advocate representing the State respondents hands over a copy of a report dated 01.09.2026 prepared by Rajat Choudhary, being the Inspector-in-Charge, Bankura Police Station and the same is taken on record. A copy of the same has been handed over to the learned advocate representing the petitioner. 14. It appears from such report that the petitioner and the respondent no.6 have filed various cases against each other. It is also submitted that the petitioner has approached the District Magistrate with his complaints and such letter was sent to the Inspector-in-Charge, Bankura P.S. for necessary action. 15. Upon receiving the letter of complaint, a proper enquiry was conducted and a specific case has been registered against Riya Neogi and the aforesaid gentleman staying with Riya Neogi, namely, Barun Garai, vide Bankura P.S Case No.-313/24 dated 04.10.2024 under Sections 115(2)/351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 92 (a) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and Section 24 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. 16. It is further submitted that after registration of the aforesaid case, LASI Sikha Das was endorsed for its investigation and after such investigation, the case has culminated in a charge-sheet vide Bankura PS C/S No-293/24 dated 31.10.2024 under Sections W.P.A . 26541 of 2025 115(2)/351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 92 (a) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and Section 24 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007 against Riya Neogi and Barun Gorai. 17. It is further submitted that in the meantime, the respondent no.6 also registered a FIR at Women PS Bankura against the petitioner and his handicapped son vide Bankura Women PS Case No- 129/2024 dated 20.10.2024 under Sections 115(2)/3(5)/351(2)/351(3)/85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 18. The aforesaid case has been endorsed to LSI Madhumita Singha and the case has culminated in a charge-sheet vide Bankura Women PS C/S No-136/24 dated 30.11.2024 under Sections 115(2)/3(5)/351(2)/351(3)/85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 19. The learned advocate representing the State respondents submits that the aforesaid cases are still pending. However, the petitioner may initiate appropriate proceedings under the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, if he so deems fit, for the reliefs that he is seeking. 20. I have considered the materials on record as well as the submissions made by the Learned Advocates. It appears that there are disputes between the petitioner and the daughter-in-law and W.P.A . 26541 of 2025 both have filed or initiated, or caused to be initiated, proceedings against each other and the same will reach their respective logical conclusions in due course of time. So far as this Writ Court is concerned, no order can be passed in favour of the petitioner at this juncture in as much as the State respondents have acted upon the complaints made by the petitioner and taken all possible actions in accordance with law. It is not the job of the respondent authorities to restore possession of the petitioner’s house to him. The petitioner and his son are also no longer residing with the respondent no.6. It is not the case of the petitioner that the respondent no.6 is visiting the petitioner’s current residence and torturing him there. The petitioner’s primary concern in the present writ petition is in respect of his house which is currently under the possession of the respondent no.6. Accordingly, this Court does not find that the petitioner is entitled to any order of police protection at present. 21. Since no order is being passed against the respondent no.6, this Court has proceeded with this matter in the absence of the respondent no.6. 22. In view of the aforesaid observations, this writ petition, being WPA 26541 of 2025, is disposed of accordingly. 23. There will be no order as to costs. 24. Since this Court has not called for any affidavit, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents. W.P.A . 26541 of 2025 25. All parties shall act on the basis of a server copy of this judgment and order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 26. Urgent photostat certified copy of this judgment and order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (RISHAD MEDORA, J.) Milan