Sumi Murmu v. Prasanta Ghosh, The Officer-In-Charge, Pandua Police Station

59 12.11.2024 NB Ct. 17 CPAN 155 of 2024 In WPA 18680 of 2023 Sumi Murmu Vs.

Prasanta Ghosh, the Officer-in-Charge, Pandua PS Mr. Pratip Mukherjee, Mr. Sakir Hossain.

...for the applicant/petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/petitioner submits as follows. By an order dated 30.08.2023 passed in WPA 18680 of 2023, among other things, this Court directed the respondent police authorities to keep a sharp vigil at the locale and ensure that no breach of peace took place. The dispute is between the petitioner who is a 60 years old lady and is the owner of the property and the private respondents who had allegedly been disturbing such possession. However, a civil suit is pending between the parties and the petitioner has obtained a favourable order from the Court. The police are neither implementing the said order nor abiding by the directions passed by this Court. From a careful reading of the application for contempt, it does not appear that the police had not taken steps when a serious or cognizable offence was committed. In fact, GD Entry was registered.

It has, however, been alleged that taking advantage of the blind eyes of the contemnor, the private respondents had gained wind in their sail and resultantly tormented the applicant.

This is despite the fact that in the body of the GD Entry, there is an allegation of threat to life.

These do not make out a specific case of violation of the Court's order.

In view of the above, let the police authorities continue to strictly comply with the order passed by this Court. However, for any further cause of action, the petitioner shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps.

With these observations, the application for contempt is disposed of, without any further order, even as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties, if applied for.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)