RENU SACHDEV Vs. COMM B S REKHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against preliminary order passed by SDM New Delhi, u/s 145 (1), Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code') on 11th May 1984 thereby assuming jurisdiction to decide the question of possession with respect to premises No : N-32 Jangpura Extension, under the provisions of the said Section. The said order was made by the SDM on the basis of police report dated 21.1.84 made by police Post Jangpura and the material accompanying it.

(2.) The facts leading to the aforesaid action of the learned SDM in brief are that a double room tenement No : 32 (A&B), Block 'N', Jangpura Extension, was allotted to Charanjit Singh Rekhi s/o Shri Nand Singh Rekhi by the Estate Office, Govt of India, vide letter dated 8th/21st Sept, 1951. The said allotment was made consequent upon his eviction from quarter No : A-23/214, Lodi Road, which he was occupying earlier, on 11.9.51. Susequently the Managing Officer/ Settlement Officer, Government Built properties,

(3.) A perusal of the Kalendra submitted by ASI, R.K. Ranga to the SDM on 21.1.84 for initiation of proceedings u/s 145 of the Code would reveal that the said ASI proceeded to the property in dispute on receipt of a telephonic measage from the police control room at 4.20 P.M. that a quarrel was going on, at Premises No: N-32 Jangpura Extension, opposite Eros Cinema. On reaching there he found S/Shri Subhash Narula, a properly broker, Smt. Manjit Rekhi w/o Shri Charanjit Singh Rekhi, Harjit Singh, Surindar Sachdeva, husband of Smt. Renu Sechdeva (all called Party No. 1 collectively alongwith Charanjit Singh Rekhi and Smt. Renu Sachdeva in the Kalendra) and S/Shri T.S. Rekhi S.S. Rekhi, both_ sons of Sh. Nand Singh Rekhi and H.S. Sarna, son in law of Nand Singh Rekhi, present in the drawing room of the said house. A little later Commander B.S. Rekhi s/o Nand Singh Rekhi too arrived there (all of them collectively termed as Party No. 2 in the Kalendra) Both the parties were quarrelling with each other and were asserting their claim of ownership over the property in dispute. Both the parties were out to fight and commit breach of peace. So, apprehending breach of peace on their part the police turned out both the parties from the house and put their own lock and seal on it.