11.2024 Ct. No.35 dc. W.P.A. 27369 of 2024 Smt. Bijoli Mondal & Anr. v. The State of West Bengal Mr. Golam Mastafa, Mr. Tarasankar Samanta & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. Golam Mastafa, Mr. Tarasankar Samanta ... For the Petitioners. Mr. Amitesh Banerjee, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr. Akash Dutta … For the State. Mr. Amal Kumar Mukhopadhyay, Mr. Rajesh Jana, Mr. Palash Kanti Chakraborty ... For the Respondent Nos. 5 to 8. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be kept with the record. The accusations made by the petitioners being the parents against the private respondent nos. 5 and 6, who happen to be the son and the daughter-in-law respectively, petitioners apprehend that they may be ousted from their residence at the behest of the private respondents. Mr. Banerjee, learned senior standing counsel appears for the State. Learned advocate for the private respondent nos. 5 to 8 is also present. Having considered the overall facts and that this is a second round of litigation which is taking place before the High Court, I direct that a lady police personnel be deputed by the Officer-in- Charge, Mahishadal Police Station who would in every alternate day for the next 15 days visit the 2 residence of the petitioners and would take a report as to whether any harassment has been inflicted upon the present petitioners. Within the aforesaid 15 days, the petitioners would approach the appropriate authority under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. In case any order is passed, the police authorities would ensure that the same is respected and obeyed. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition being WPA 27369 of 2024 is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (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.