Waheed Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 14447 MP

                                                          1
                           IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT INDORE
                                                  BEFORE
                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
                                                     &
                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
                                            ON THE 4 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
                                            WRIT PETITION No. 22741 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          WAHEED KHAN S/O SHRI UMRAO KHAN, AGED 43
                          YEARS, OCCUPATION: FARMER MANDALKHAN, PO
                          LOHARKHEDA, TEH. SUJALPUR, DIST. SHAJAPUR
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....PETITIONER
                          (SHRI ROHIT SHARMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL
                                THROUGH SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT
                                VALLABH BHAWAN, MANTRALAY, BHOPAL
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
                                THROUGH SECRETARY ROOM NO. 11 (NSA
                                SECTION) 2ND FLOOR MAJOR DHYAN CHAND
                                STADIUM NEW DELHI (DELHI)

                          3.    DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND COLLECTOR
                                DISTT. SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DISTT. SHAJAPUR
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                   .....RESPONDENTS
                          ( SHRI BHUWAN GAUTAM, LEARNED GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR THE
                          RESPONDENT/STATE)



                                This petition coming on for admission this day, Justice Sushrut Arvind

Signature Not Verified
                          Dharmadhikari passed the following:
Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN
Signing time: 9/5/2023
6:37:26 PM
                                                               2
                                                               ORDER

Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner in the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for the following reliefs:

(i) Issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ, may kindly be issued to the respondent directing them to restrain to initiate proceedings under NSA only on the basis of political vendetta and wrecking vengeance against the petitioner and also restrain from demolishing the house of the petitioner in garb of proceedings under NSA.

(ii) Issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ, may kindly be issued directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and in case any proceedings are initiated against him he may be given proper opportunity of hearing.

(iii) Grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is a Sarpanch of Village Mandalkhan and due to political rivalry, an FIR bearing Crime No. 209/2023 for the offences punishable u/S 4289 of IPC r/W Sec 25 of Arms Act and Sections 4,5,9 of M.P. Govansh Vadh Pratished Adhiniyam, 2004 was registered against seven persons including the petitioner alleging that all the accused persons were involved in killing of cow progeny. However, the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail by the trial Court itself. Respondents have initiated proceedings under the National Security Act and Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 9/5/2023 6:37:26 PM

have demolished the house of the co-accused persons, therefore, the petitioner has real and reasonable apprehension that his house may also be demolished. In view of threat of demolition of his residential house, it can be said to be a threat to the fundamental right of life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has pressed into service the judgment passed by Patna High Court in the case of Bhuvneshwar Prasad Vs. State of Bihar & Another [AIR 1995 PAT 1] to contend that in similar case, the Patna High Court had entertained the writ petition against a a threatened demolition of petitioner's residential house treating it to be a threat to his fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the present petition may be allowed.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that the writ petition is based on a mere apprehension and as such, it cannot be entertained, is far too puerile to receive any serious consideration.

4. Heard, learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

5. On perusal of the writ petition as well as the documents, not a single document has been filed by the petitioner to show the ownership/lease hold of the land in question on which the building is sought to be demolished. The petitioner has directly approached this Court without exhausting any civil

remedy, which may be available to him under the law.

6. So far as the reliance placed by learned counsel for the petitioner on the judgment passed in the case of Bhuvneshwar Prasad (supra) is concerned, the facts of the case in hand are altogether different from that of the facts in the case of Bhuvneshwar Prasad (supra) where the father of the petitioner was granted a lease for construction of a house and for establishment Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 9/5/2023 6:37:26 PM

of a petrol pump by the competent authority. However, in the present case not a single document has been brought on record to prove the ownership/ lease hold etc on the property. Therefore, the judgment cited above is of no assistance to the petitioner.

7. In the absence of any document to show the ownership/leasehold on the property as well as the fact that this petition has been filed merely on the basis of apprehension, this Court is not inclined to exercise the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

8. Accordingly, the same being bereft of merits and substance is hereby dismissed.

                               (S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)                                   (PRANAY VERMA)
                                        JUDGE                                              JUDGE
                          sh




Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN
Signing time: 9/5/2023
6:37:26 PM