NB Ct. 14 v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. Somnath Ghoshal, Mr. Satyajit Senapati. …for the petitioner. Mr. Wasim Ahmed, Sk. Md. Masud. ….for the State. Mr. Gautam Das, Mr. Tapan Kr. Maity. …for the respondent nos.6,7&8. Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. Report filed on behalf of the State is also taken on record. A copy of the order relied upon by the private respondents is also taken on record. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the bargadar in the land in question as his predecessor was there as a bargadar and they had been enjoying the land as bargadar for the last 50 years. The private respondents are subsequent purchasers of the property who are entitled only to get a share of the produce as per law. They have been offered such share, but they are not interested for taking the same. They want to grab the entire property. The petitioner moved an application before the 2 learned Magistrate who directed that the right of the bargadar in respect of such land was to be protected.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents denies the allegations made in the writ petition and submits as follows. The respondent nos.6, 7 and 8 purchased the property in 2021. After that, they were compelled to move the Magistrate under Section 144(2) of the Code. The learned Magistrate ordered that the rightful possessee was to be protected. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the report and submits as follows. On the complaint of the petitioner, a specific FIR has been registered being Sagar P.S. Case No.307 of 2023 dated 24.07.2023 and is being investigated into. A proceeding has also been initiated under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is trite law that the rights of a bargadar needs to be protected. However, the owner of the land is also entitled to a share in the produce as per law. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner undertakes to provide the stipulated share of the produce to the owner of the land.
Operative part
It also appears that the police have also taken necessary steps on the complaint of the petitioner, first, by registering an FIR and then, by instituting a proceeding under Section 107 of the Code. Therefore, no further order need be passed in this regard. 3 However, the police authorities shall keep a strict vigil at the locale so that no breach of peace takes place and see to it that no order of a Court is violated. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for. (Jay Sengupta, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 107.
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.