Arun Pal @ Arun Kumar Pal v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

5.6.2026 Ct. no. 7 sb Sri Arun Pal @ Arun Kumar Pal -Vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Dipanwita Ganguly Ms. Arpita Chakraborty ...for the Petitioner Mr. Souryadeep Ghosh Mr. Amar Krishna Saha Mr. Satyajit Senapati Mr. Rahul Nag ...for the respondent No. 11 Mr. Rajdeep Mazjumder, A.A.G, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Madhu Jana Mr. Asit Kumar Dey ...for the State

1. The present writ petition has been filed, inter alia, praying for a direction upon the police authorities to restrain respondent no. 11 from disturbing and interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner in respect of its two storied building including its shop room on the ground floor at Mouza -Parul, J.L no. 38, R.S. 3111, Touzi no. 1 R.S. Dag no. 1844, L.R. Dag no. 2301 and 2295, R.S. Khatian no. 248, L.R. Khatian no. 9/3, being holding no. 88/2 at Parul School Road, Post OfficeArambagh.

2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the respondent no. 11 , who is the co-owner of the aforesaid property, is interfering with the petitioner's right to maintain his livelihood by running its

business operation from the shop room at the ground floor of the above building.

3. The private respondent is represented and submits that the private respondent has not in any way interfered with the business operations of the petitioner. He further submits that the previous attempt made by the petitioner in approaching the court, was turned down by an order dated 27th November, 2025 in WPA 22788 of 2025 by a coordinate Bench of this court on the ground that the disputes between the parties are civil in nature.

4. The Additional Advocate General representing the State, has placed a report and submitted that on the basis of the complaint, the police authorities had taken steps, according to him, no cognizable offence has been made out or detected.

5. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties, and noting from the disclosure made by the learned advocate for the petitioner in the form of a certificate of enlistment, which is taken on record, and also upon ascertaining from the learned advocate for the private respondent that the private respondent does not intend to obstruct the petitioner from carrying out the business operation and have never in the past, obstructed the business operations or in any way interfered with the petitioner's peaceful possession, I am of the view

of that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the writ petition pending.

6. The writ petition stands disposed of by observing that the petitioner shall be at liberty to carry out the business operation from the premises in question in accordance with law.

7. Liberty is granted to Mr. Amar Krishna Saha, learned advocate on record for the respondent no. 11 to file Vakalatnama in the department.

8. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)