Tekchand Sharma Alias Tikaram vs Raghu Nandan Alias Ruggi And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 628 P&H

CRM-M No. 7038 of 2021                                                    -1-

        In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh


                                                  CRM-M No. 7038 of 2021
                                                  Date of Decision: 16.2.2021

Tekchand Sharma @ Tikaram                                          ......Petitioner


                                         Versus


Raghu Nandan @ Ruggi and another                                ......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:     Petitioner in person.

                     ****

HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J. (ORAL)

Case is taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of

FIR No. 118 dated 8.6.2020 under Sections 285, 447, 34, 120-B IPC and

Sections 27, 54, 59 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station

Hassanpur, District Palwal and all the subsequent proceedings arising

therefrom.

Petitioner submits that he is an ex-serviceman and an Advocate

and the present FIR has been got registered by respondent No. 1 in collusion

with the police officials. He further submits that there is a property dispute

between the real brothers from the last 20 years and they have also filed the

civil suits against each other, which are still pending. He further submits

that a compromise was effected between the parties but respondent No. 1 in

connivance with other associated partners, concealed the material facts of

the compromise and tampered the MOA. He further submits that he has

been granted protection by the Commissioner of Police, Faridabad.

1 of 2

The petitioner has not disputed the fact that his brother

Raghunandan has already approached this Court by way of CRM-M-24934-

2020 and vide order dated 30.9.2020, the said petition was disposed of with

liberty to approach the Magistrate concerned.

Notice of motion to the State-respondent No. 2 only.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Manish Dadwal, AAG,

Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the State.

Without going into the merits of the present case, the present

petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the

Magistrate concerned with all the pleas, as have been raised in the present

petition, if so advised, in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya and Ors. Vs. The State of Gujarat

and Anr., 2019 AIR (SC) 5233. On his doing so, the Magistrate concerned

would take the cognizance of the application and decide the same, as per

law.

                                        (HARNARESH SINGH GILL)
                                              JUDGE
February 16, 2021
Gurpreet

Whether speaking/reasoned :             Yes/No
Whether reportable        :             Yes/No




                               2 of 2