R M TIWARI Vs. ADITYA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is apetition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking relief for the issue of the writ of mandamus to the respondents to pay a sum of Rs. lO lakhs to the petitioner by way of compensation consequential upon the commission of the offence of house trespass by the respondents.

(2.) Briefly, stated, the facts giving rise to this petition, are as under: The petitioner is a practising Advocate. On 16.7.1993, one Risaldar Chanda Singh, a Junior Commissioned Officer of the President's Bodyguard Unit of the Indian Army, engaged the petitioner to defend him in a departmental proceedings initiated against him by the Military Authorities. According to the petitioner, on 26.10.1993, at about 7.30 P.M. when he reached his house, he found that his office-cum-residence was put under blockade by the respondent Nos.2 to 8 and 10. He also found two lady A.S.I, alongwith 5 to 6 armed policemen standing on the main door passage of the house causing wrongful confinement to his family members. On being questioned by the petitioner, the police party declared its intention to search his house to recover the identity card from Risaldar Chanda Singh who had been hiding himself in the petitioner's house. However, despite the petitioner's strong protest, the respondents wrongfully entered the petitioner's house and illegally searched and ransaked his house. Thereafter, the petitioner rushed to the P.S. Dabri, New Delhi to lodge a report of the alleged incident, but the respondents No.2 to 8 and 10, who were present at the Police Station, threatend and intimidated the petitioner. Hence this petition.

(3.) Respondents No.1 to 10 denied the petitioner's case and alleged that on 26th October, 1993 Risaldar Chanda Singhwas discharged from service and after notification of the said discharge order, he was directed not to leave the unit lines until his identity card was returned and the formalities of his discharge were completed. But, in defiance to the said directions, Risaldar Chanda Singh, rushed out in uniform and unauthorisedly left the unit lines at about 3.45 on his scooter without depositing the identity card. It is further alleged that in the interest of service security and norms, it was essential to collect identity card from Chanda Singh. Hence, respondent No.2 Was detailed to follow Chanda Singh for the said pur. pose. At about, 4.15 p.m., the respondent No.2, accompanied by some 4 to 5 persons of the unit, followed Chanda Singh who had taken shelter in the petitioner's house, after parking his scooter outside the house. It is also alleged that the petitioner's children were familiar with the personnel o" the P.B.G and on seeing them, they invited the said personnel and the re spondent No.2 to come into the house but they declined to enter the house and requested them to send Chanda .Singh out so that his identity card could be collected from him. On this request, the petitioner's wife denied presence of Chanda Singh in her house. Thereafter respondent No.2 contacted the respondent No. I on phone and who advised him to seek police assistance to recover and seize the identity card from Chanda Singh. Accordingly, police, assistance was sought and the police authorities requested the family members of the petitioner to ask Chanda Singh to come out and surrender his identity card but they refused to co-operate with the police. Since the petitioner was not present and only female members of the petitioner's family were in the house, A.S.I, did not enter the petitioner's house and called lady police for the said purpose.' While they were waiting for the lady police to come, at around 6.15 p.m. the petitioner came to the house. In the meantime, at around 6.20 p.m. A.S.I. Jiya Ram Yadav accompanied by two lady police officers also arrived at the spot and asked the petitioner regarding whereabouts of Chanda Singh. Incensed by this, the petitioner became extremely rude and threatened the police with dire consequences as a result whereof the police did not search the petitioner's house. However, the police seized Chanda Singh's scooter under Section 66 D.P. Act which was parked in- side the petitioner's house.