31 Dec 2023 3:00 AM GMT
Any social boycott of a citizen or his family member has to be dealt with strictly by the Administration. This has no place in a civilized society, the Calcutta High Court vacation bench observed in a case wherein a man and his family had been boycotted by their neighbourhood because they objected to, and obtained an interim order of injunction against a temple being constructed by the respondents illegally in front of their property.
A single bench of Justice Jay Sengupta took exception to the social boycott imposed on the petitioners by the local residents and said: the Police authorities are directed to keep a sharp vigil at the locale, ensure that no breach of peace takes place and no order of a Civil Court is violated. Surveillance shall include frequent visits to the area by police patrol.
It was submitted by the petitioners that the respondents were allegedly illegally constructing a temple on a plot in front of their house, and in doing so disturbing their peaceful possession.
Petitioners had filed a civil suit against the same and obtained an interim order of injunction against the construction of the temple, whose land was disputed, and the State had initiated proceedings under Section 107 of the CrPC against the respondents.
Petitioners submitted that when they objected to the respondent's activities, a social boycott was imposed on them by the locals and respondents.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the plea by directing the police to ensure that the order of injunction was not violated and that there was no breach of peace in the area.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 353
Case: Sri Ranajit Mondal v The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Case No: W.P.A. 11715 of 2023