VIJAY KHANNA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner No. 1 is the husband of petitioner No. 2. They filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution initially in October, 1994 seeking writ of mandamus for directing the Union of India, respondent No. 1 and Lt. Governer of Delhi, respondent No. 2 to institute an independent inquiry into the actions taken by the other respondents in collusion with one another against the petitioners and their family members. Direction was further sought to the respondents particularly Nos. 16 & 17 to restore possession of house No. E-224, Sainik Farm, New Delhi, to the petitioners. On March 28, 1995 Shri Vipin Sanghi, Advocate appearing for the petitioners made statement that the petitioners do not press the first part of the prayer as made in the writ petition. By the judgment dated April 12,1995 the petition was dismissed in limine by a Division Bench of this Court. Feeling aggrieved petitioners filed Crl. Appeal No. 629/1997 (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 1327/1996) in the Supreme Court which was disposed of by the order dated July 15, 1997 observing as under:

(2.) . After remand on the application filed by the petitioners for impleadment and amendment of cause title the name of deceased N.K. Jain, respondent No. 12, was deleted from the array of the parties and M.S. Rathi, Inspector of Police, J.P. Meena, Inspector of Police, Raj Kumar Inspector of Police, Anil Soni and Mrs. Madhu Soni were impleaded as respondents 17 to 21 respectively.

(3.) . In the amended writ petition it is, inter aha, alleged that petitioner No. 2 purchased plot of land bearing No. E-224, measuring 500 sq. yards, in Sainik Farm in 1991 and thereafter she got constructed a house consisting of ground and first floors thereon. The total built up area of the house is about 8500 sq. yards and the total cost of construction was in excess of Rs. 30 lacs. Rajiv Gupta, respondent No. 13, a neighbour of the petitioners introduced petitioners sometime in March, 1993 to Pritpal Singh Chauhan @ Ganju Chauhan, respondent No. 7, Balbir Singh Chauhan @ Bibba Chauhan, respondent No. 8, Ranjit Singh Chauhan @ Ponty Chauhan, respondent No. 9, all brothers (hereinafter referred to as 'Chauhan Brothers') and owners of Chauhan Jewellers having their showrooms at Karol Bagh and South Extension Part-11, to help them identify a business partner overseas since petitioner No. I had vast contacts overseas which he had developed over a period of 18 years. Petitioner No. 1 introduced Abdul Razak, an Iraqi national based on Jordan with whom he had business dealings in the past.