Patna High Court
SURENDRA NARAYAN MISHRA @ SURESH MISHRAversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME, PATNA
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The criminal writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioners to pursue civil injunction or criminal proceedings.
Summary
Petitioners Surendra Narayan Mishra and Bijay Kumar Mishra filed a criminal writ petition seeking security against private respondents who were allegedly threatening their life and preventing them from peacefully accessing their demarcated land in Salempur. The State argued that the petition was not maintainable because effective civil and criminal remedies were available, such as filing a criminal case for trespass or a civil suit for a permanent injunction. Petitioners contended that the boundary had already been settled by the Circle Officer and that the respondents were unlawfully disturbing their possession. The State further highlighted a title dispute, noting that the respondents claimed ownership based on Basgit Parcha and their Scheduled Caste/Tribe status. The petitioners requested permission to withdraw the writ and pursue the alternative remedies. The Court granted the withdrawal, dismissed the writ as withdrawn, and directed the petitioners to approach the appropriate civil or criminal forum without delay.
Issues considered
- Whether a criminal writ petition is maintainable when alternative civil and criminal remedies are available.
- Whether the boundary dispute has been settled and the respondents' actions constitute criminal trespass.
- Whether the title dispute based on Basgit Parcha affects the petitioner's right to seek relief.
Subjects
- criminal trespass
- property dispute
- writ petition
- alternative remedy
- injunction
- land demarcation
- scheduled castes
- scheduled tribes
- Basgit Parcha
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1158 of 2021
======================================================
1. Surendra Narayan Mishra @ Suresh Mishra S/O Late Mahendra Narain
Mishra R/O Village-Salempur, P.S-Ujiarpur, District-Samastipur.
2. Bijay Kumar Mishra @ Bijay Mishra S/O Surendra Narain Mishra R/O
Village-Salempur, P.S-Ujiarpur, District-Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Home, Patna Patna
2. The District Magistrate Samastipur.
3. The Superintendent Of Police, Samastipur.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer Dalsingsarai, District-Samastipur.
5. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Dalsingsarai, District-Samastipur.
6. The Sho Ujiarpur, District Samastipur.
7. Asha Devi W/O Sukun Sada R/O Village-Salempur, P.S-Ujiarpur, District-
8. Pappu Sada S/O Sukan Sada R/O Village-Salempur, P.S-Ujiarpur, District-
Samastipur.
9. Minta Devi W/O Pappu Sada R/O Village-Salempur, P.S-Ujiarpur, District-
Samastipur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarendra Narayan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Suman Kumar Jha, AC to AAG-3
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
17 09-02-2026 The present criminal writ petition has been preferred
by the petitioners praying for security on account of facing
constant threat to their life from the private respondents No. 7 to
9 who are not allowing the petitioners to go to their land
peacefully, the land being situated at village- Salempur, under
Khata No.-72, Khesra Nos.1317, 1318; Khata No. 55, Khesra
No.1319. They are praying for security also for the reason that
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1158 of 2021(17) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
they want to repair the pillars and fencing of their land which
was created after demarcation of boundary by the Circle Officer,
Ujiarpur.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned AC to AAG-3 for the State.
3. Learned AC to AAG-3 for the State submits that the
petition is not maintainable in view of efficacious alternative
remedy being available in Civil and Criminal Law. Petitioners
have liberty to file criminal case for criminal trespass on their
land and damage to their property. They have also remedy to go
to competent Civil Court with Civil Suit for permanent
injunction against the private respondents who are creating
disturbance in peaceful possession of their property.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners is submitting
that there is no boundary dispute after demarcation of the
boundary because boundaries dispute has already been settled
by the Circle Officer and the private respondents are creating
disturbance to the peaceful possession without any rhyme and
reason. They are committing offence of criminal trespass and
damage to property of the petitioners.
5. At this stage, learned AC to AAG-3 for the State
submits that private respondents are claiming title to the
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1158 of 2021(17) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
property on the basis of Basgit Parcha because they belong to
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Community. Hence,
there is dispute of title to the land in question.
6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners is
seeking permission to withdraw the present criminal writ
petition with liberty to take civil and criminal remedy as per
law.
7. Permission is granted.
8. Accordingly, the present criminal writ petition is
dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to move
competent Civil Court for permanent injunction if so advised or
they can file even F.I.R. to the police for criminal trespass and
damage to their property if he is again so advised. If such
measure is taken, the competent authority or Court are required
to pass appropriate order as per law without any undue delay.
(Jitendra Kumar, J.)
ravishankar/-
U T
Checking your session…