Patna High Court
Ram Umesh Rai @ Umesh RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the allegations are unsubstantiated and the police have taken appropriate steps.
Summary
Ram Umesh Rai filed a civil writ petition seeking a direction to the State authorities to prevent alleged nuisance by vested interests on his land. The petition alleged that despite multiple representations, the respondents had failed to act. The State, represented by the District Magistrate and police officials, denied the allegations and submitted a police report indicating steps were being taken to maintain peace. The court examined the counter‑affidavit and the police report, finding no substantive basis for the relief claimed. Consequently, the court disposed of the petition, noting that the matter was adequately addressed by the police and no further intervention was required.
Issues considered
- Whether the court can issue a direction to the State authorities to prevent alleged nuisance on the petitioner's land
- Whether the petitioner's allegations are substantiated enough to merit relief
Subjects
- civil writ jurisdiction
- land nuisance
- preventive direction
- state authority
- police report
- petition dismissed
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18151 of 2019
======================================================
Ram Umesh Rai @ Umesh Rai Son of Sri Muneshwar Roy Resident of
Village- Birnamatula, P.O. and P.S.- Angarghat, Anchal- Ujiarpur, District-
Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Samastipur.
2. The District Magistrate, Samastipur.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Samastipur.
4. The Officer-in-charge, Angarghat Police Station, Samastipur.
5. Bindeshwar Mahato Son of Lat Jaddu Mahato Resident of Village-
Birnamatula, P.O. and P.S.- Angarghat, Anchal- Ujiarpur, District-
Samastipur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad (SC-8)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 03-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“for necessary direction to the
superior respondent-authorities to prevent
nuisance by certain vested interest over the
petitioner’s land, details of the land is mentioned
in the body of the writ petition despite series of
representations and reminders thereto to the
respondents.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.18151 of 2019(3) dt.03-02-2026
2/2
3. A counter affidavit on behalf of the Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Samastipur is on record and it has
denied the allegation made in the writ petition. The report of the
SHO, Angarghat submitted to the Superintendent of Police,
Samastipur has also been brought on record by way of
Annexure-A. Paragraph no. 16 further shows that the Police is
taking all steps to maintain peace between the parties.
4. In that background, nothing remains, the writ
petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…