Sadhu Mahto And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8966 of 2015 ====================================================== 1.

Sadhu Mahto and Ors 2.

Bahadur Mahto, 3.

Paras Mahto, 4.

Jatta Mahto, All Sons of Late Lala Mahto, Resident of Village - Khusrupur Chauraha, Baikatpur, P.O. and P.S. - Khusrupur, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The State of Bihar, through District Magistrate,Patna. 3.

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Barh, Patna. 4.

The Rural Superintendent of Police, Patna.

5.

The Officer-in-Charge, Baikhtiyarpur Police Station, Patna. 6.

The Circle Officer, Barh, Patna.

7.

The Circle Inspector, Bakhtiyarpur, Patna.

9.

Babaji Rai, Both Sons of Sobhit Rai, 10.

Rameshwar Rai, Son of Mahabir Rai, 11.

Jagat Rai, Son of Palaki Rai, 12.

Bindeshwar Rai, Son of Bulaki Rai, All 7 to 11 resident of village - Hardaspur, P.S. - Baktiyarpur, District - Patna. 14.

Nanda Rai, Son of Late Mitan Rai, 15.

Basawan Rai, 16.

Shatrughan Rai, Both Sons of Late Madan Rai, 17.

Ramdeo Rai, 18.

Pramod Rai, Both sons of Late Yadu Rai, 19.

Pinku Rai, Son of Biraj Rai, 20.

Yugal Rai, Son of Ramdeo Rai, 21.

Eknam Rai, Son of Jitan Rai, All 12 to 20 resident of Village - Dedaur, P.S. - Bakhtiyarpur, District - Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rekha Prasad, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Shekhar Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Priyadarshi Matri Sharan, AC to AAG-15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

Patna High Court CWJC No.8966 of 2015(6) dt.26-03-2026 2/3 26-03-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):

(i) For issuance a writ of Mandamus upon respondentno.4 to show cause as to why no action has been taken against respondent no.7 to 20 for forcefully harvested and looted crops of petitioners in presence of respondent no.4 and 5 even after clear direction of respondent no.1 given in its order dated 04.09.2014 passed in Land Dispute Case No. 01/2014-15 containing Annexure: 10.

(ii) For issuance of writ of mandamus upon respondent no. 4 to show cause as to why he had not instituted case against respondent no.7 to 20 in spite of repeated requests both oral and written information dates.

(ii) For issuance of writ of mandamus upon respondent no.2 and 3 to show cause as to what steps has been taken on the application of petitioner no.1 dated 10.02.2015 for taking immediate action as there was apprehension of committing loot of the crops of the land of the petitioners on which order has been passed on 04.09.2014 by respondent no.1 itself.

iv) For issuance of writ of

Patna High Court CWJC No.8966 of 2015(6) dt.26-03-2026 3/3 mandamus upon respondent no.4 to take appropriate action for protection of life and property of the petitioners from the hands of respondent no.7 to 20 who have looted the harvested crops of the petitioners in presence of respondent no.4 and 5 on the point of deadly weapons.

(v) For issuance of appropriate order directing respondent no. 2 to 5 to take appropriate and immediate steps for recovery of petitioner's crops from respondent no.7 to 20 or direct them to net payment of cost of the looted properties as is evident from the photographs taken on the date of the said loot.

(vi) Any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioners may be on entitled may also be given to them.

3. On 19.02.2026, four weeks' time was granted to file substitution petition.

2. As it was a peremptory order and not complied, stood dismissed on 19.03.2026.

3. Perused the file, consigned.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U