PREM CHAND Vs. PANCHHI RAM AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition filed under S.397/401 CrPC, is directed against order dated 28.3.2019 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Manali, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, whereby an application having been filed by the petitionercomplainant (hereinafter, 'complainant') under S.145 CrPC, praying therein for restoration of possession of premises i.e. Shop No. 6 situate in Manu Market, Manali, came to be rejected.

(2.) Key facts, necessary for the adjudication of the present case as emerge from the record are that the complainant filed complaint (Annexure P-3 )under S.145 subsections (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6) sub Clauses (A) and (B) and subsections (7), (8), (9) and (10) CrPC seeking restoration of premises in question i.e. Shop No. 6 situate in Manu Market, Manali, namely "Prem General Store", alleging therein that somewhere in the year 2011, respondent started interfering in the premises and as such, complainant filed Civil Suit No. 8/11 in the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Manali, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh titled Prem Chand vs. Panchhi Ram, which came to be decreed in favour of the complainant vide judgment and decree dated 27.5.2013. Vide aforesaid judgment and decree, possession of premises in question was directed to be restored in favour of complainant and respondent was restrained from dispossessing the complainant from the premises save and except in due course of law. Allegedly on 16.3.2019, at about 9.15 pm, some persons posing themselves as owners, illegally entered and trespassed the premises and threatened the complainant. They allegedly threw out articles and stock from the premises. Complainant filed FIR No. 41, dated 16.3.2019 under Ss. 447, 427 and 34 IPC with the Police Station, Manali. By way of application, complainant prayed that by way of interim measure, his possession may be restored after opening the locked premises. After having received aforesaid complaint filed under S.145 CrPC, SDM, Manali, called for report from the Station House Officer, Manali, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh vide letter dated 19.3.2019 (Annexure P4). Station House Officer, Manali, submitted report (Annexure P-5) stating therein that on 16.3.2019, complainant Prem Chand informed telephonically that some drunk persons are forcibly trying to dispossess him by throwing articles from his shop. As per report, complainant also alleged that nephew of Panchhi Ram alongwith two other persons, forcibly entered his shop and threw out articles. He also alleged that he was forcibly dispossessed from shop No. 6, Manu Market, Manali and as such, appropriate action may be taken. Police report also suggests that the complainant also alleged that before the Police could reach the premises, persons mentioned above, had already locked the premises and left the scene. Police, in its report informed the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Manali that a case under S.447 read with S.34 IPC stands registered and articles lying outside the shop were handed over to the complainant on Sapurdari.

(3.) On the basis of aforesaid report submitted by SHO, Manali, SDM passed impugned order dated 19.3.2019, whereby he dismissed the complaint filed under S.145 CrPC, stating therein that since S.145 deals with dispute with respect to possession causing apprehension of breach of peace, he has no justification to initiate proceedings under S.145 because civil court has already passed injunction order restraining the respondent from causing any interference in the peaceful possession of the complainant. Vide aforesaid order, SDM directed complainant to approach competent Court of law for settlement of dispute. In the aforesaid background, complainant has approached this Court in the instant proceedings with a prayer to quash and set aside impugned order.