✦ Calcutta High Court

Judgment · High Court

TIRTHANKAR GHOSH

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Ms. Juin Dutta Chakraborty Mr. D. Kundu Mr. B. Modak Ms. A. Kundu … for the Petitioner(s) Mr. Jahar Lal De Mr. Durga Bhusan Mukhopadhyay … for the State-respondent(s) Mr. S. K. Routh Re … for the respondent nos.7,9&10 The petitioner has approached this court as after the order being passed by the learned civil court in TS 252 of 2021, the same has not been complied with by the police authorities. Learned advocate also refers to the proceeding being MP Case No. 534 of 2025 wherein specific directions were passed. State has submitted a report. I have considered the report and I find that the police authorities have restricted themselves by drawing up a proceeding under Section 126/135 of the BNSS. Learned advocate for the private respondents submits that there has been complete suppression of facts in filing of the present writ petition. Having considered the nature of the prayers advanced for implementing the civil court’s order, I am of the view that the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked in cases relating to disputes between the private parties. Accordingly, WPA 13331 of 2025 is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. Report so submitted be kept with the record. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Calcutta High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments