HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity 'CrPC') has been filed for directing the respondents not to harass, humiliate and pressurize the attorney of the petitioner and his family members and caretakers to handover the possession of his house to Piara Ram accused and others and to compromise the matter with them. Further prayer has been made to issue directions to the respondents to protect the life and property of the petitioner and his family members and caretakers. It is further prayed to issue direction to respondent No.4 to take necessary legal action on the complaint of the petitioner and conduct a free and fair investigation.

(2.) It is alleged that petitioner is residing abroad and visits India occasionally and thus he had hired the services of Piara Lal @ Piara Ram and his wife Surinder Kaur residents of village Khatkar Khurd to take care and look after his father Naranjan Singh. For the services rendered by Piara Ram and his wife, they were paid a sum of Rs.5000/- per month. Father of the petitioner had died on 8.6.2011. Upon the demise of his father, the services of Piara Ram and his wife were no more required. To look after his property and house the petitioner had appointed his cousin brother Gurjinder Singh son of Mohan Singh. It is alleged that Piara Ram through his wife filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against the petitioner, restraining him from interfering and dispossessing them from the house of the petitioner. After filing civil suit Piara Ram and his wife Surinder Kaur along with their children and daughter-in-law illegally and forcibly broke open the locks of the house of the petitioner and stole the households lying therein. On 23.6.2011, Gurjinder Singh, attorney of the petitioner, came to know about the theft by Piara Ram and his family members. The matter was reported to the village Panchayat and the police but the police failed to initiate any action against the accused persons. The accused having failed to get any relief from the civil Court withdrew the civil suit on 15.12.2011. It is further alleged that police is pressurizing the attorney of the petitioner to hand over the possession to Piara Lal, otherwise he would be implicated in false criminal case of trespassing. The attorney of the petitioner has also submitted a complaint to the police but no action has been initiated against Piara Lal @ Piara Ram and his family members for breaking open the locks of the house of the petitioner and illegally trespassing into his house and stealing the household goods.

(3.) After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that in case the petitioner claims himself to be in possession of land and there is a threat of his being dispossessed, the proper remedy is to file a suit for permanent injunction. This Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC is not to embark upon an inquiry to determine as to who is in possession of the land.