Ma Chandi Durga Ispat Limited v. Union Of India And ORS.

10.07.2025 W.P.A. 12002 of 2025 Item No.49 Ct. No.35 dc.

Ma Chandi Durga Ispat Limited versus Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Satadru Lahiri, Mr. Sunil Gupta, Ms. Swapna Jha, Ms. Supriti Sarkhel ... For the Petitioner.

Mr. Suman Sengupta, Mr. Sanatan Panja ... For the State.

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be kept with the record.

Report submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be also kept with the record. A copy of the report be handed over to the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that in spite of the factory premises being attached by CGST authorities, there have been several incidents of the assets of the factory being removed at the behest of unknown miscreants and this has been repeatedly taking place. Further there was an incident of fire as has been complained of. It is also alleged that since the property is attached, the petitioner/company is unable to enter the property or deploy any security personnel for taking care of the assets of the company/factory.

State has submitted a report. The ground reality is not denied by the State. However, so far as the protection of the assets of the company is

concerned, the State is dependent on the mobile patrolling of the local police station. The incidents which were complained of by the petitioner were investigated by Coke Oven Police Station and to that effect, after investigation, charge-sheet has already been submitted before the jurisdictional court.

Having regard to the fact that there has been incident of theft as well as fire and the petitioner is exhausting its remedies in respect of the issues with the CGST authorities, I direct that if the petitioner is interested to protect the assets of the factory, petitioner would make a representation to the Deputy Commissioner of Police in-charge of Coke Oven Police Station for deployment of police personnel at its own cost. The same may be informed to the CGST authorities as the attachment order is at the behest of the said authorities. The incident which had taken place in course and during the process of attachment should be taken into account by the Deputy Commissioner of Police and accordingly after informing the CGST authorities, it may be considered that regular deployment of police personnel be entrusted at the cost of the petitioner for a period which the Deputy Commissioner of Police deems fit and proper.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition being WPA 12002 of 2025 is disposed of.

There will be no order as to costs.

All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)