DWARKA PRASAD Vs. SHIVANATH GUPTA & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This is an application under Sec. 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing of proceedings under Sec. 145 Cr P.C.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that applicant Dwarika Prasad is a tenant in the disputed shop for the last more than ten years. The shop was purchased by respondent No. 1 Shiv Nath Gupta from the previous owner and after sometime respondent No. 1 filed a suit for the ejectment of Dwarika Prasad in the Court of Prescribed Authority, Allahabad. During the pendency of the ejectment proceedings the landlord, Shiv Nath Gupta, filed an F.I.R. on 3.11.1989 which is annexure '1' to the petition. It was alleged in the F.I.R. that Shiv Nath Gupta has purchased the house No. 54 Katra, Allahabad, from the previous owner and Dwarika Prasad proposed was a tenant in a shop which is part of the house. According to the F.I.R., during the pendency of the ejectment proceedings, Santosh Kumar son of tenant Dwarika Prasad, that the dispute should be amicably settled out of Court. As a result of mutual talks a compromise was arrived at on 26.10.1989 under which Santosh Kumar and his father Dwarika Prasad took a sum of Rs. 10,000.00 from Shiv Nath Gupta as cost of furniture and as compensation. It was also alleged by the landlord in the F.I.R. that the lock of the landlord was put on the shop on 26.10.1989. However, on 3.11.1989 at 6.00 p.m. when Shiv Nath Gupta went to open 'the shop, Santosh Kumar did not allow Shiv Nath Gupta to open the shop and started a quarrel. The landlord further alleged that the tenant again wants to take possession of the shop. The police registered a case on the basis of this F.I.R. and started investigation of the same.

(3.) On. 11.1.1990 Shiv Nath Gupta filed an application before the Additional City Magistrate under Sec. 145 sub-clause (1) Cr. P.C. in which the allegations contained in the F.I.R. were repeated and it was further alleged that the tenant is trying to collect undesirable per,sons and he wants to take possession of the shop by show of force. The Additional City Magistrate obtained a report of the Tehsildar and passed a preliminary order annexure '3'. After sometime the landlord moved an application for the attachment of the shop and the Additional City Magistrate obtained a report from the police station and on the basis of report dated 18.4.1990 passed the attachment order under Sec. 146 Cr. P.C., vide annexure '7'. The present petition under Sec. 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed for quashing the attachment as well as the proceeding under Sec. 145 Cr. P.C.