Sukumar Chakraborty v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

M/L 847 13.08.2025 Bpg.

ct.no.35 W.P.A.21984 of 2024 Sukumar Chakraborty

Versus

State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Palash Mukherjee Ms. Priyanka Saha Samanta.

...for the petitioner.

Ms. Tanima Sengupta.

...for the State-respondents.

Petitioner is aggrieved that in spite of informing the Inspector-in-Charge, Dum Dum Police Station regarding the disturbance, obstruction and interference created by the private respondents, thereby disturbing the lawful construction work over the schedule property which the petitioner claims to be inherited, no steps were taken even though there were directions under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. According to the learned advocate, the private respondents violated the order of the learned Executive Magistrate and exhibited their muscle power and the police authorities remained dormant by way of not responding to the information so furnished.

As none appears on behalf of State, Ms.

Tanima Sengupta, learned advocate, who ordinarily appears on behalf of the State, is directed to represent

the State. Her appearance may be regularized by the concerned authorities.

I have considered the information which was sent to the police authorities along with the anxiety and agony expressed by the petitioner. Having considered the same, I am of the view that in case the same inconvenience is faced by the petitioner, petitioner would inform the Inspector-in-Charge, Dum Dum Police Station who would assess and ascertain regarding the genuinity of the allegations and take steps in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observations, WPA 21984 of 2024 is disposed of.

There will be no order as to costs.

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

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

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)