MUKESH JAIN Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Misc. Application under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the order dtd. 28/6/2011, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Misc. Application no. 165 of 2011, Mukesh Jain vs Jai Prakash Mittal and others, whereby application filed by the applicant under Sec. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. was rejected. A further prayer has been made for quashing the order dtd. 2/5/2012, passed by the Sessions Judge, Dehradun, in Criminal Revision no. 101 of 2011, Mukesh Jain vs State of Uttarakhand, dismissing the revision preferred against the order dtd. 28/6/2011.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that mother of the applicant, who claims herself the tenant of Society known as Panchayati Mandir Panjikrit Samiti, filed an original suit no. 285 of 1978, titled as Smt. Santosh Kumar vs Panchayati Mandir. During the pendency of said suit, the accused-respondents fabricated forged papers of Society claiming themselves to be its officer bearer. Application under Sec. 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed by the applicant on 26/9/2010, whereupon C.J.M., Dehradun directed the police to lodge FIR in the crime. Said FIR was registered as case crime no. 435 of 2010, under Ss. 430, 380 of IPC against Jai Prakash Mittal and others (accused-respondents) at P.S. Kotwali Dehradun. It is alleged in the FIR that the civil appeal of the applicant titled as Mukesh Jain and others vs Panchayati Mandir Samiti is pending in the court of Addl. District Judge I, Derhadun. The named accused persons harbour enmity with the applicant as the shop / workshop of the applicant is on the property of Panchayati Mandir Samiti (Society), where he is a tenant. Accused persons had no connection with the Society, despite said fact they used to claim themselves as office bearers of said Society. When the applicant made a complaint in this regard to the President and Secretary of Panchayati Mandir, the Secretary submitted an application on 31/8/2010 to Superintendent of Police, Dehradun. It is also alleged that accused persons are trying to misappropriate the rent with the intention to cause financial loss to the applicant. Taking advantage of applicant's absence from his shop / workshop, the accused persons used to misappropriate the goods causing loss to him, so that the applicant would be compelled to vacate the shop and hand over the possession to the accused persons. It is also alleged that when the applicant went to Delhi in regard to marriage of his daughter for the period 16/7/2010 to 18/7/2010 and on his return when he reached his shop on 19/7/2010, he found that the accused persons have forced opened the lock of the entrance gate of the property and damaged the property of the applicant and threatened the applicant to dispossess him. When applicant resisted such move, the accused persons hurled abuses and threatened the applicant of dire consequences. Said complaint was made with P.S. Kotwali Dehradun on 20/7/2010, but to no avail.

(3.) It is further alleged that on 27/8/2010, when the applicant went to Sonipat, in his absence on 29/8/2010, the accused persons with the help of labourers dismantled the southern and western wall of one room and verandah, which is part of property no. 118, and had removed one folding press sheet worth Rs.75,000.00, two iron plates, measuring about 16'X3' about - inch in thickness worth Rs.75,000.00 and iron scrap worth Rs.50,000.00. Report in this regard was lodged by Piyush Jain, nephew of the applicant, with P.S. Kotwali Dehradun on 29/8/2010, but neither the police took any action against the accused persons nor were the articles recovered. On repeated requests when the police did not lodge the FIR, the applicant moved an application to Sr. Superintendant of Police, Dehradun, but to no avail.