LAKHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Lakhan Lal petitioner seeks quashing of First Information Report No. 200 dated 17.3.2001, under Sections 420/423/466/467/468/34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) registered at Police Station City Ballabgarh.

(2.) The circumstances which led the registration of the present case against the petitioner-accused need to be noticed briefly.

(3.) Mr. P.K. Jain, complainant addressed a communication to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Faridabad. It was stated by him that they had some ancestral property situated at Ballabgarh and dispute had arisen out of the family partition which was pending in the Court. A direction had been issued by this Court to the parties to maintain status quo regarding possession till further orders. It was also stated that the Civil Court at Faridabad had come to a finding that the complainant had 11/60th share in all the suit properties while Nem Chand, Sumat Parshad, Raghubar Dayal and Rattan Lal had 11/60th share and Smt. Devi, Sheela Devi, Kamla Devi, Kunti Devi and Meena had 1/60th share in the suit property, Lakhan Lal son of Kishan Chand at the time of filing of the suit was a tenant in a portion of the property situated in Ward No. 7, Bainiawara Gali, Jain Mandir, Ballabgarh under Sumat Parshad, uncle of the complainant who was deaf and dumb. While deciding the Civil Appeal No. 611/65 of 1999, the Additional District Judge, Faridabad vide his judgment and decree dated 25.9.1999 had held that Lakhan Lal used to be a tenant in portion of the property and he had been impleaded as a party to the case along with other tenants but the property was lying unoccupied and unpossessed. The complainant came to know that Lakhan Lal had colluded with his uncle and had tried to get possession of the property forcibly. For the reason, he had moved an application in police post Ballabgarh in this regard. On coming to know that Lakhan Lal not only misbehaved and abused him but also but put his claim as owner of the said property on the basis of forged and fraudulent documents taking the plea the he had purchased the same from Sumat Parshad, on 8.11.2000, a meeting was held at police post Ballabgarh where it was decided that Lakhan Lal would not interfere with the property in dispute. Soon after the companions of Lakhn Lal started interfering in possession of the property and in order to grant the same, shutters were put in that property forcibly by him. On 22.11.2000, report was made to the police post Ballabgarh in this regard. Sub Inspector, Ram Avtar registered FIR No. 15 of 22.11.2000 and thereafter inspected the spot. Lakhan Lal was also summoned at the spot and was verbally asked not to cause any disturbance in the possession of the property and a report to this effect was recorded vide No. 17 of 22.11.2000. On 28.11.2000, Lakhan Lal with the help of 100-150 persons forcibly put the shutters at the site and was able to grab the property illegally and unauthorizedly by holding back brothers of the complainant from approaching the police station. The brother of the complainant had telephonically informed the police but no action was taken on his report. It was stated by the complainant that land mafia had forcibly occupied the property in dispute despite the fact that the matter was pending before the Court. On coming to know about lodging of the report and allegations made against the petitioner- accused, the present petition has been filed.