LAWS(GJH)-1978-10-8

RASIKLAL S GANDHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On October 19, 1978
RASIKLAL S.GANDHI Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question of considerable importance is raised by Mr. D. K. Shah the learned Counsel for the petitioner by urging that any member of the State Police functioning either under the Bombay Police Act 1951 or under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 or under any other law for the time being in force has no authority of law to deprive any citizen of his actual possession of the residential premises in the name and garb of Bonafide Police Investigation when two rival claimants approach the police and make complaints that each of the two rival claimants is entitled to possess the actual physical possession of the residential premises. In substance the debated point at the bar is that if under the circumstances the State police adopts a partisan attitude under the colour of its office and authority and takes steps in favour of one of the claimants to the prejudice and detriment of the other the only inevitable inference is that the State Police acts with requisite mala fides and thereby exceeds beyond the statutory circumscribed limits of law and consequently compels the actual possessor of the residential premises to submit not to rule of law but to the rule of ancient primitive ages which is thoroughly alien to the present set up of a civilised democratic society.

(2.) In order to appreciate the point raised by Mr. Shah a few relevant facts may be stated.

(3.) The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 read with Article 31 of the Constitution of India and in substance prayed that the respondents viz. the Additional Commissioner of Police the Inspector of Police and others should be directed to remove the seals affixed on the petitioners residential premises forthwith and to quit from the possession of the petitioners premises. The petitioner also prayed for a direction that the respondents should not disturb the petitioners possession of the premises in question except under an order of any competent Court. The petitioner also prayed for certain interim reliefs as set out in paragraph 12(iii) and (iv) of the petition.