Patna High Court
RAM PRAVESH VERMAversusThe State of Bihar through Home Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as it pertains to a civil family dispute without sufficient evidence of threat, and the petitioner is directed to approach the Security Committee.
Summary
The petitioner, a practicing advocate, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State to prosecute his relatives and to provide police protection, alleging threats arising from a family land dispute. The Court noted that the petitioner and respondents are close relatives and that a criminal case under IPC sections 467, 468, 471, 420 and 34 had already been registered and closed as a civil land dispute. It held that a writ under Article 226 requires a clear, imminent threat to life or property, which was not substantiated in the petition. Accordingly, the Court declined to entertain the writ and directed the petitioner to approach the District/State Security Committee for any perceived threat. The petition was therefore disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus and police protection can be issued in a civil family land dispute lacking a demonstrable threat to life or property.
- Whether the petitioner has provided sufficient material to establish a threat perception justifying judicial intervention.
- Whether the appropriate forum for the grievance is the State/District Security Committee rather than the High Court.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- family dispute
- land dispute
- writ of mandamus
- police protection
- civil vs criminal jurisdiction
- threat perception
- security committee
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.785 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- BAKHARI District- Begusarai
======================================================
Ram Pravesh Verma Son of Late Gulo Verma, Resident of Village-
Makkhachak, P.O. and P.S.- Bakhri, District- Begusarai (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Home Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna
Bihar
2. Director General of Police, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. Patna
3. Superintendent of Police, Begusarai. Begusarai
4. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bakhri, Begusarai. Bakhri
5. S.H.O., Bakhri, P.S.-Bakhri, District-Begusarai. Bakhri
6. Ram Prasad Mahto S/o Late Gulo Mahto Resident of Village-Makkhachak,
P.O. and P.S.-Bakhri, District-Begusarai
7. Ravindra Kumar Ravi @ Radhe Mahto Resident of Village-Makkhachak,
P.O. and P.S.-Bakhri, District-Begusarai
8. Mohan Kumar Son of Ram Prasad Mahto Resident of Village-Makkhachak,
P.O. and P.S.-Bakhri, District-Begusarai
9. Manish Kumar Son of Ram Prasad Mahto Resident of Village-Makkhachak,
P.O. and P.S.-Bakhri, District-Begusarai
10. Arun Kumar Son of Ram Prasad Mahto Resident of Village-Makkhachak,
P.O. and P.S.-Bakhri, District-Begusarai
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC-8
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 13-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the
petitioner seeking following reliefs:
“(a) To issue a writ of mandamus or any
other writ or writs, direction / directions
commanding upon the state respondents to take
legal action against the private respondents 6 to 10
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.785 of 2022(5) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
and to give police protection to save life as they are
committing overt act with the petitioner and his
family members and in spite of giving information
to the local police they are not taking any action
against them.
(b) To pass any such other order or orders
as this Hon’ble Court thinks fit & proper.”
3. However, the bare perusal of the contents of the
writ petition shows that the petitioner and the private
respondents are close relatives. Petitioner and respondent no. 6
are brothers and respondent nos. 7 to 10 are sons of respondent
no. 6. The petitioner is a practicing advocate as submitted in the
writ petition and there appears a land dispute between the
parties which bears from paragraph no. 7 of the writ petition. It
also transpires from the record that against alleged unlawful acts
of the private respondents, Bakhri P.S. Case No. 163 of 2019
has been registered under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 420 read
with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. But, the police found
that case of land dispute and submitted a final form.
4. The petitioner has approached this Court in a
family dispute which is out and out a civil dispute. So far as the
claim of the petitioner about the protection of his life, liberty
and property is concerned, it is the duty of the State to protect
the life and liberty of a person and also to protect his lawful
possession. But, there should be a clear threat perception to the
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.785 of 2022(5) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
life and property of a person and there must be material
particulars on record to support such claims. Moreover, the State
has come up with State / District level Security Committee for
redressal of such grievances of a person who are apprehending
threat to their life and property and petitioner can always
approach such Committee if he apprehends any threat to his life
and liberty.
5. Since the dispute between the petitioner and
private respondents appears to be civil in nature and material
particulars are distinctly lacking in the writ petition showing
threat perception to the life and property of the petitioner, I am
not inclined to entertain the writ petition at present and the same
is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the
District / State level Secutiry Committee for redressal of his
grievance if he still feels threatened.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Shahnawaz/-
U T
Checking your session…