Calcutta High Court
WPA/29528/2025 of BHARATI MAHATA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 9 October 2026
DL/Item No.–151 [Milan] WPA 29528 2025 BHARATI MAHATA VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. Mr. Aninda Bhattacharya ….for the Petitioner Mr. Lalratan Mondal ….for the Respondent Nos.5 to 9 1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2.
09.10.2026
Court No.758
DL/Item No.–151
[Milan]
WPA 29528 2025
BHARATI MAHATA
VS
THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
Mr. Aninda Bhattacharya
….for the Petitioner
Mr. Lalratan Mondal
….for the Respondent Nos.5 to 9
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been possessing and cultivating a land situated at LR Dag No.915, Mouza-Kalaikunda, JL No.64 under LR Khatian No.711, area of land 05 decimal under Police Station – Kharagpur (Local) in the district of Paschim Medinipur. The petitioner submits that the private respondents are regularly threatening her with dire consequences.
3. In such circumstances, the petitioner lodged a complaint dated 09.10.2025, inter alia, with the Officer-in-Charge of the Kharagpur (Local) police station. However, despite such complaint, the police authorities have not taken any steps in the matter.
4. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the instant writ petition, inter alia, praying for a direction upon the police authority to look into the complaint dated 09.10.2025.
2
5. The learned advocate for the private respondent nos.5 to 9 appears and opposes the writ petition contending that the same is misconceived.
6. Heard the parties and considered the materials on record. It appears that no order can be passed in the present petition in exercise of extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
7. This order shall not prevent the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate with appropriate application to redress his grievance for non registration FIR, pursuant to such complaint dated 09.10.2025. This view is in light of the judgment reported in (2026) 2 SCC 622 [Om Prakash Ambadkar vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.].
8. If the application is filed by petitioner, the same shall be disposed of in accordance with law.
9. In view of the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition being WPA 29528 of 2025 is disposed of accordingly without any order as to costs.
10. All parties shall act on the basis of a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
11. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all necessary formalities.
(Anuj Singh, J.)