(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed by Sukhdev Singh son of Pritam Singh (complainant) against the impugned order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa dated 15.3.2001 setting aside the order dated 23.12.1995 of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirsa vide which the respondents were summoned.
(2.) SUBHASH Chander respondent No. 1 had expired during the pendency of this petition and this factual position has not been controverted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Thus, the present revision petition survives against Om Parkash, Block Development Officer, Rania District Sirsa (respondent No. 1) only. Before proceeding further, it may be mentioned that learned counsel for the petitioner has moved a miscellaneous application bearing Crl. Misc. No. 3224 of 2003 for placing on record the copy of order passed by this Court in Civil Revision No. 3618 of 1999 decided on April 23, 2002. Since the learned counsel for respondent No. 1 had no objection to it, the same was allowed and the copy of order in the said Civil revision was taken on records vide order dated 24.1.2003.
(3.) THE facts as emerge from the complaint are that the petitioner and his brothers had purchased some residential plots from Gram Panchayat of village Rania way back in 1969 and had constructed their houses upon the same. In the recent past they had some apprehension from the hands of Ajit Singh and others (accused No. 1 to 22 in the original complaint) that they would forcibly have the possession of the houses or would encroach their property and as such the petitioner had filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the said persons from taking the land into their own hands. It is then the case of the petitioner that the said civil suit was dismissed by the learned trial court but the said judgment and decree was subsequently modified by the lower appellate court (Additional District Judge) vide judgment dated 13.2.95 on the basis of a compromise between the parties. It may be mentioned that the property of Gram Panchayat Rania then vested in Municipal Committee, Rania. It is then the case of the petitioner that the Municipal Committee, Rania who was not a party before the Additional District Judge came up to this Court by way of filing a civil revision petition No. 3618 of 1999 challenging the said compromise decree between the parties and in the said civil revision petition, it has been ordered by this court that the revision against the judgment dt. 13.2.95 is just an abuse of the process of the court and is not at all maintainable. The contention of the petitioner, thus, is that the judgment passed by the learned appellate Court on the basis of the compromise between the parties is still intact and final. It is then the case of the petitioner that accused Ajit Singh etc. (No. 1 to 22 in the original complaint) in connivance with respondent No. 1 being Block Development Officer/Administrator Municipal Committee Rania, Subhash Chander, Secretary Municipal Corporation Rania (since deed) and other four Safai sewaks of Municipal Committee Rania namely Faquir Chand, Darshan Lal, Mehar Chand and Sawar Singh who are also the accused in the complaint had taken the law into their hands and forcibly demolished the pucca houses of the petitioner and his brothers. The petitioner, thus, was constrained to file a complaint under sections 440/148/149/506/342 IPC against Om Parkash respondent No. 1, Subhash Chander respondent No. 2 (since dead) and other 26 persons.