MANINDER SINGH Vs. UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr. P.C.' for short) for quashing the case FIR No. 49 dated 8.3.1999 (Annexure-P.1) registered at Police Station South, Sector 34, Chandigarh for the offences under Sections 451, 448 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) on the basis of compromise reached at between the petitioners and respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

(2.) PETITIONER No. 1 and respondent No. 2 are real brothers. Petitioner No. 2 is the wife of petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 3 is the wife of respondent No. 2. On the basis of a complaint made by respondent No. 2, the aforesaid FIR was registered against the petitioners. As per allegations in the FIR dated 8.3.1999 (Annexure P-1), it is alleged by the complainant (respondent No. 2) that he is owner of house No. 3002, Sector 32-D, Chandigarh. He is a non- resident Indian settled in USA and visits Chandigarh regularly with his family. It is alleged that during his visits he stays for about one month and his wife and son for about four-five months in the said house. On 19.12.1998, they came to Chandigarh, after a brief stay of the complainant (respondent No. 2) at the house of his in-laws, they went to the house on 24.12.1998 with his father-in-law and family friends. Upon their arrival in the house, they found that the living arrangements as described in DDR No. 58 dated 6.5.1998 (copy attached) had been disturbed. The room which was in their exclusive possession on the first floor, which was left locked, had been broken into through the cooler window. Cooler's grill had been disturbed and the latches were missing. The list of articles that were stolen had been indicated in the FIR. Besides, it was observed that the premises were being used by the petitioners who had moved without authorisation into common areas of the house as described in DDR No. 58 dated 6.5.1998 such as the first floor guest room and prayer room and hall way. In addition, there were a lot of unknown people (domestic servants) in the house and attempts were made to hinder their access into the premises. A request was made to take immediate action and register a case of theft with regard to break into their room occurring through the cooler and punish the culprits and restore the common areas of the status with unhindered access as described in DDR No. 58 following which a case of criminal trespass be registered against the offenders. On the basis of the said complaint, as already noticed, FIR was registered.

(3.) ON notice, affidavit has been filed by respondent No. 3 in which the factual averments are accepted and it is submitted that the civil suit filed by respondent No. 2 for mandatory injunction qua the property in possession of the petitioners was decreed by both the civil Courts and the same was upheld upto the Apex Court and in the meantime the mother of petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 died and the petitioners came in possession of part of the property held by the mother since they were staying together for the last 30 years.