Patna High Court
Rajiv Ranjan Singh vs The State Of Bihar Through The Director … on 10 April, 2025
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.801 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-225 Year-2019 Thana- SHRIKRISHNAPURI District- Patna
======================================================
Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Son of Ramchandra Singh Resident of Village - Wajitpur,
P.S.- Bihata, Distt.- Patna. at Present resident of 401, Pushpa Mension
Apartment, Vivekanand Park Road, P.S.- Patliputra, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director General Of Police, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Inspector General Of Police, Central Range, Patna.
4. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna.
5. The Superintendent of Police , City, Central, Patna.
6. The Sub- Divisional Police, Secretariat, Patna.
7. The Inspector cum officer incharge, S.K. Puri Police Station, Patna.
8. Dipak Kumar Son of Late Surendra Prasad Sah Resident of Mohalla -
Lohapatti, P.S.- Kotwali, Distt.- Bhagalpur.
9. Ameeta Mehta D/o Late Ranjet Singh Resident of Village - L.B.Nagar Near
Pillar No.17, in front of Dipa Clinic Big Bazar, P.S.- Shashtrinagar, Dist.-
Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vinay Ranjan, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 10-04-2025
Petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):-
(i) "For issuance of a writ in the
nature of mandamus commanding
and directing the respondent
authorities specially Senior
Superintendent of Police, Patna to
restore the possession of the
petitioner in his house as the
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.801 of 2021 dt.10-04-2025
2/7
petitioner has been dispossessed
forcefully and illegally by the S.K.
Puri Police in favour one Depak
Kumar without adhering the rule of
law and further for issuance of
direction to take appropriate action
against the then Inspector cum
S.H.O. S.K. Puri Police Station and
further for issuance of any other
appropriate writ or writs order or
orders it may deem fit and proper by
this Hon'ble Court.
(ii) Prayer was also made to issue a
writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding and directing the
respondent authorities specially
Senior Superintendent of Police,
Patna to restore the possession of
the petitioner in his house as the
petitioner has been dispossessed
forcibly and illegally by the S.K. Puri
Police in favour of respondent no. 8
without adhering the rule of law.
2. Explaining the background of the litigation, it is
submitted by Mr. Vinay Ranjan, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner that property bearing plot no. 10B situated at Sahdeo
Mahto Marg, Shrikrishnapuri, P.S. Shrikrishnapuri, Patna was
purchased by this petitioner from the owner of the said plot,
namely Late Ranjit Singh through "agreement to sale" dated
09.12.2016
, where 90% of consideration money was already paid.
It is pointed out that as 90% of consideration money was already
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.801 of 2021 dt.10-04-2025
3/7
paid, late Ranjit Singh, the owner of aforesaid plot handed over
the possession of said property to the petitioner. It is submitted
that unfortunately petitioner sent to judicial custody in connection
of criminal case and for said reason he could not get sale
agreement absolute but after getting release from jail, he
approached immediately, the land owner for executing the sale
deed. It was agreed between the parties and, therefore, the land
owner late Ranjit Singh obtained “No Objection Certificate” (NOC)
from Patna Improvement Trust with which the land/property was
initially inquested but in the meantime, late Ranjit Singh became
sick and unfortunately he died on 02.06.2017, therefore sale deed
could not executed. It is further submitted that petitioner applied
before municipal corporation for getting mutation in his favour and
eventually the said property was mutated in the name of petitioner
vide order dated 18.12.2018 and subsequently, electricity
connection also transferred in the name of petitioner and since
then petitioner continuously depositing municipal tax as well as
electricity bill.
3. It is further submitted by learned counsel that after
the death of Ranjit Singh, his daughter (respondent no. 9) came
from U.S.A. and started to reside at Patna. She was approached
by this petitioner and requested to receive balance amount of the
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.801 of 2021 dt.10-04-2025
4/7
property and execute the sale deed as she is the only legal
heir/successor of her father as her mother was already died during
the life time of her father but for any unforeseen reason, the
daughter of the petitioner (respondent no. 9) did not inclined to
execute the sale deed and, therefore petitioner served legal notice
to her through his advocate on 27.12.2018 through speed post.
Consequent upon, the respondent no. 9 also sent a complaint to
S.S.P., Patna. It is pointed out that due to aforesaid compelling
circumstances, petitioner filed a suit under the provisions of
specific performance of Contract Act as Title Suit No. 268 of 2019
for direction to respondent no. 9 to execute the sale deed in favour
of petitioner, which is pending for adjudication.
4. It is further submitted that all of sudden on
06.07.2019 respondent no. 8, namely Deepak Kumar alongwith
police force came at the house of the petitioner and made captive
of his wife and also with help of police confined his staff and
thereafter taken all the belonging of the petitioner from the said
house. At the time of aforesaid occurrence, petitioner was in his
native village and he was informed by his wife about the incident.
Upon said information, petitioner came to Patna immediately and
lodged an FIR, which was registered as S.K. Puri P.S. Case No.
225 of 2019 dated 06.07.2019 against respondent no. 8 and his
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.801 of 2021 dt.10-04-2025
5/7
associates. Police personnels were not implicated under police
pressure. Only in police station he came to know from SHO that
one S.K. Puri P.S. Case No. 224 of 2019 dated 06.07.2019 is
already lodged against him and in connection thereto his staff has
been arrested. Concluding the argument, it is submitted by learned
counsel that the aforesaid FIR categorically reveals that house in
question was in possession of petitioner which was forcibly
vacated. In support of his submission, he also relied upon certain
photographs which has been annexed with present petition as
Annexure- 5 series. It is pointed out that the FIR has lodged
against him and his wife and staffs, in order to giving space to
respondent no. 8/Deepak Kumar and, therefore, the manner in
which without adhering the rule of law, the petitioner dispossesed
from aforesaid property, was in gross violation of article 300A of
the Constitution of India.
5. Mr. Praveen Kumar, learned counsel appearing for
respondent no. 8 submitted that the present criminal writ was
brought after two years of the occurrence, for which, the petitioner
already lodged a case of specific performance as submitted above.
It is submitted that the present writ petition preferred only to
create a legal pressure upon all the respondents as to get benefit in
the criminal case lodged against petitioner. It is further submitted
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.801 of 2021 dt.10-04-2025
6/7
that from the avertments of present criminal writ it can be
gathered safely that the callous of the dispute between the parties
are civil in nature for which efficacious remedy is already availing
by petitioner after lodging a case for specific performance which is
pending before the court of Sub-Judge, Patna as Title Suit No. 268
of 2019.
6. Concluding the argument, it is submitted by Mr.
Praveen Kumar that respondent no. 8 purchased the plot no. 10B
from respondent no. 9 who is admittedly absolute owner by
succession being the only legal heir of late Ranjit Singh. It is
submitted that the respondent no. 8 will extend his all cooperation
for early disposal of aforesaid title suit.
7. Considering the aforesaid fact and circumstances
as admittedly petitioner brought this criminal writ after two years
of occurrence, where dispossession of petitioner by respondent no.
8 and police personnel prima facie not appears convincing as the
police personnel were not implicated as an accused through FIR
i.e. S.K. Puri P.S. Case No. 225 of 2019, as lodged by this
petitioner and, admittedly, the disputes are civil in nature for which
the petitioner is already availing the civil remedies which is
pending before the court, and was registered much before lodging
this criminal writ, accordingly, this Court finds that the present writ
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.801 of 2021 dt.10-04-2025
7/7
petition is devoid of any merit.
8. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed.
9. Let copy of this order be sent to the trial court,
without delay.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 15.04.2025 Transmission Date 15.04.2025