LALIT SHARMA Vs. JAGDISH SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners have preferred the present petition under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter referred to as 'the Code') for quashing the proceedings under Sec. 145 of the Code pending in the Court of the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gohar.

(2.) Brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that the Respondents filed an application under Sec. 145 of the Code against the Petitioners on the allegations that they had constructed their four storeyed new houses in Purana Bazaar Sundernagar and some portion of the old and new houses had been given on rent by both of them and remaining portion of the new construction is in their possession. On 17.5.2003 the Respondents forcibly entered in the kitchen of their old house and locked their bath room. On 10.6.2003 the Respondents forcibly locked the front door of the houses of the Respondents and thus wrongfully dispossessed them and occupied the same without any right or title. On 21.5.2003 and 15.6.2003 F.I.Rs. were lodged at Police Station Sundernagar. The Petitioners, however, tried to damage the house of the Respondents and caused nuisance therein thus rendering the property of the Respondents unsafe and that there is every likelihood of breach of peace because of the danger to the property. After recording the statement of one of the Respondents the Sub Divisional Magistrate below came to the conclusion that a dispute had arisen and accordingly directed issue of notices to the Petitioners to produce proof regarding possession of the houses. Pursuant to such notices, the Petitioners appeared before the Court below and filed their reply. At the same time the Court below was informed of moving an application for transfer of the case in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi. After considering the matter, the Court below observed that there was apprehension of quarrel between the parties and on 10.6.2003 a complaint under Sec. 107/151 of the Code had already been presented in the Court of the ADM Mandi in which personal bonds and surety bonds each in the sum of Rs. 2,000 had been taken and the matter had been referred to him for further action in the matter. Even thereafter the petition was received from the Respondents about quarrel between the parties on 16 and 21.6.2003. On the basis of these observations the Court below felt satisfied that the situation exists wherein there can be a quarrel between the parties at any moment resulting in loss of life and property and breach of peace. Therefore, the house constructed by the Respondents was ordered to be sealed and regarding possession of the old house parties were directed to place their version before the Court on 15.7.2003. However, thereafter no further action could be taken by the SDM Sundernagar because the case alongwith the aforesaid proceedings under Sec. 107/150 of the Code stood transferred to the learned SDM Gohar. The substantial order so far passed by SDM Gohar in the proceedings is dated 8.12.2003 whereby the Petitioners were proceeded ex parte in the proceedings and directions were given for sealing the unsealed portion of the house i.e. a kitchen and a bathroom in the ground floor and Tehsildar Sundernagar was directed to comply with the order. In the meanwhile, the Petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing the proceedings on the grounds that the proceedings before the SDM are not maintainable because the Respondents have already instituted three civil suits in the Court of the learned Sub Judge, Sundernagar vide Annexures P-7, P-8 and P-9 and in one of such civil suits orders to maintain status quo at the spot had been passed. It is claimed that the whole of the ancestral property is in the possession of the Petitioners and one jai Kishan, who is not a party to the proceedings and in view of the civil suits having been instituted, the proceedings under Sec. 145 of the Code are not maintainable, that the SDM below failed to appreciate the reply filed by the Petitioners and arbitrarily proceeded ex parte to pass the orders for sealing the kitchen and bath room and that various types of criminal proceedings have been instituted by the Respondents against the Petitioners with a view to harass and pressurise them because of the pendency of the civil suits regarding the property in dispute.

(3.) The Respondents despite ample time and opportunities failed to file reply.