Dr. Rajneesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5792 of 2026 ====================================================== Dr. Rajneesh Kumar S/o Late Triveni Prasad Singh, R/o Vill. Nadawan, PS Barh, District Patna, Phone No 8797130947.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through The Collector, Patna. 2.

The Collector, Patna.

3.

Sub-Divisional Officer, Barh.

4.

Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.

5.

SHO, PS Barh, District Patna.

6.

Priyesh Kumar, S/o Late Manish Kumar, R/o Vill. Nadawan, PS Barh, District Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumar Sameer, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Pranoy Kumar, AC to GP-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 04-05-2026 Heard Mr. Adarsh duly assisted by Mr. Kumar Sameer, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The present application has been preferred: for issuance of proper writ, order or direction to the respondent no. 1 to 5 to protect the rightful possession and rights of the petitioner over the house in question described in paragraph no.3 and pending final hearing of this application. The respondent no.6 may not be permitted to dispossess the petitioner from the property by use of physical force or may grant any other relief/reliefs which may found the petitioner is entitled to.

3. In his ancestral property, the petitioner who is a medical professional is running his clinic for last one decade but his

Patna High Court CWJC No.5792 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026 2/2 nephew (respondent no. 6) is creating disturbances which is not only lowering the image of the petitioner in the eyes of public, it is also affecting his business.

4. Learned State Counsel submits that if there is any threat, the Police Official will take care and further, for the said disturbances created by his nephew, the petitioner ought to approach the respondent no. 3, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Barh, Patna.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier, he preferred a petition but remained unattended.

6. This Court is of the opinion that if such petition is presented before the respondent (Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Barh, Patna), he/she is duty-bound to look into matter, issue notice and pass an appropriate order.

7. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to approach the respondent no. 3, the SubDivisional Magistrate, Barh, Patna who shall be acting strictly in accordance with law after service of notice to the respondent no. 6 as also any other troublemaker.

8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U