ROMILA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner had filed a suit for perpetual injunction which was listed as civil suit No. 92/2002 in which she has averred that she is the lawful owner and is in possession of property bearing shop No. WZ-II, Jawalaheri Market, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi. In that case she has been granted injunction by the court which is under challenge by the respondent. The respondent has also filed a suit for Specific Performance and Permanent & Mandatory injunction alongwith Declaration pertaining to this very property seeking relief on the ground that the petitioner had sold the property to him and that the possession was also handed over to him when part payment was made. Both the suits are pending in which parties have challenged each other's documents on the ground that those are forged and fabricated. Petitioner has averred that amount of rupees five lakh taken from respondent was friendly loan. On this loan petitioner had been paying interest @ Rs. 25000/- p.m. which was paid till February 2001, and thereafter, matter was settled for rupees six lakhs to be paid by the petitioner. Petitioner has repaid substantial amount out of the agreed amount now only Rs. 90,000/- left to the paid. Respondent denies that it was a friendly loan or that petitioner has paid any amount. Respondent also denies any settlement. According to him those documents have been forged. Be that as it may, fact remains these are the respective allegations of the parties in their respective suits which can be appropriately gone into by the civil court. It is also an admitted fact that as of today injunction operates in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent from interfering in her possession of the property in question. In this view of the matter it prima facie cannot be said that she has tress-passed her own property.

(2.) We are of the view that the question of tress-pass of the property which belongs to the petitioner till such time suits are decided does not arise. Therefore, under these circumstances when the matter is already sub-judice before the civil court for determining the title and the right of the parties, we are of the view that criminal proceedings prima facie would not be maintainable. We accordingly quash the FIR No. 545/2002 u/s 380/448, IPC registered at Police Station Paschim Vihar, New Delhi. Any proceedings initiated thereon pursuant to the said FIR No. 545/2002 under Sections 380/448, IPC registered at police station Paschim Vihar pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate are also ordered to be dropped. Order accofdingly.

(3.) The petition stands disposed of.