During the court proceedings, the observation was made in response to a man’s plea, wherein he claimed to be experiencing social ostracism in his neighbourhood. This alleged isolation was reportedly a result of his objection to the unauthorised construction of a temple in front of his property.
The Calcutta High Court, in the case of Ranajit Mondal vs State of West Bengal, emphasised the necessity for strict action by authorities against the social boycott of a citizen or their family members. Justice Jay Sengupta made this observation while addressing a plea in which a man claimed to be subjected to social ostracism in his locality. This alleged victimisation was purportedly a consequence of his objection to the unauthorised construction of a temple in front of his property.
In an order dated December 27, Justice Sengupta stated, “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 civilised society.” The court further emphasised that if any party wishes to establish their rights regarding the property in question, they should pursue legal means before the civil court, emphasising that no party has the right to take the law into their own hands.
The petitioner had filed a civil suit against certain individuals disturbing his peaceful possession of the property, leading to an injunction order. However, it was reported to the High Court that the respondents continued to violate the injunction and, along with other locals, subjected the petitioner to social boycott.
The State counsel informed the court that, while a civil dispute is ongoing, proceedings under Section 107 (Security for keeping the peace) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) have been initiated to maintain peace in the area.
Acknowledging the injunction order against the private respondents, the court directed the police to closely monitor the area, ensuring the preservation of peace and compliance with the civil court’s order. The court specified that the surveillance should involve frequent police patrols in the area.
The plea was disposed of with Advocate Somnath Mukherjee representing the petitioner, and Advocate Amritlal Chatterjee representing the State.
