Devender Pal Singh vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 73 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 458/2019

Devender Pal Singh S/o Mr. Bajinder Singh, Aged About 65 Years, R/o 820, 2Nd Floor Greater Kailash- Ii, New Delhi 110048.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State, Through The Chief Secretary Secretariat Jaipur, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. Station House Officer, Police Station Amba Mata, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

3. Satyandera Pal Singh S/o S. Bajendra Pal Singh Sikh, R/o 33-A, New Fatehpura, Udaipur (Rajasthan)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr Bahar U.Barqui Mr M.A.Siddiqui For Respondent(s) : Mr S.K.Bhati - PP Mr Rajesh Mehta-ASI - I.O.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

04/01/2022

This criminal writ petition is filed by the petitioner

praying for following reliefs:

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to

(a) issue an appropriate writs, orders and/or directions in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents No.1 & 2 to undo their illegal activities getting Respondent No. 3 take out from the property of the petitioner No.33-A, New Fatehpura, Udaipur, Rajasthan which was encroached upon at the instance upon Respondent No.2 and further writs, orders and/or directions commanding the Respondents No.1 & 2 not

(2 of 5) [CRLW-458/2019]

to implicate petitioners or his family members in any false and fictitious case in respect of the facts and circumstances set out hereinafter, in the interest of justice.

(b) And further writ, order or direction directing concerned police officials to register an efficacious criminal case including registration of FIR and initiation of disciplinary proceedings against Respondent No.2 herein for his such activities and bring him to justice;

(c) Pass any other and further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

In this writ petition, the petitioner has claimed that he

is the sole owner of house No.33-A, New Fatehpura, Udaipur and

respondent No.3, brother of the petitioner (now dead) filed a

partition suit claiming that he is having 1/4th share in the house.

The said suit came to be dismissed by the concerned civil court,

Udaipur on 29.07.2019 while holding that the petitioner is sole

owner of the said property and as such the respondent No.3 has

no right to get the property in question partitioned.

It is alleged that after passing of the judgment and

decree by the competent civil court on 29.07.2019, when the

petitioner came to know that someone encroached over the suit

property at the instance of respondent No.3 in a portion of servant

quarter, he lodged a complaint at concerned police station on

08.08.2019. He also served a legal notice on 03.09.2019 upon

respondent No.3 and the encroacher encroached over the servant

quarter at the instance of respondent No.3 on 03.09.2019.

However, the respondent No.2 i.e. Station House Officer, Police

Station, Amba Mata, Udaipur gatecrashed into the house of the

(3 of 5) [CRLW-458/2019]

petitioner at the instance of respondent No.3 and started

threatening to them. He forced the petitioner and his wife to

vacate the house and threatened that they would falsely been

implicated into a criminal case.

It is submitted by the petitioner that he had no option

except to vacate the house in the midnight of 19-20.09.2019 and

stayed at Hotel Radisson, Udaipur. The petitioner is claiming that

he is a handicapped and paralytic person and he is having serious

threatening from respondent No.2 for implicating him, his wife and

other family members into false criminal cases.

With the averments made in this writ petition, the

petitioner has prayed for the reliefs as quoted above.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner

moved an application dated 29.09.2021 (Inward No.2/2021)

stating therein that the respondent No.3 was bachelor and died

issue-less on 04.05.2021 leaving behind no legal heir and,

therefore, his name may be deleted from the array of the

respondents. In the said application, the petitioner also sought

direction that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 be directed not to

create any obstruction in any manner whatsoever any enjoyment,

occupation, complete physical possession of the property bearing

33-A, New Fatehpura, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

Later on, the petitioner further moved an application

Inward No.3/21 on 13.12.2021, in which it is prayed that the

respondent Nos. 1 and 2 especially respondent No.2 be directed

not to interfere or create any obstruction in any manner

(4 of 5) [CRLW-458/2019]

whatsoever when the petitioner visits his resident premises

bearing No.33-A, New Fatehpura, Udaipur till final disposal of this

writ petition.

Pursuant to the direction given by this Court, learned

Public Prosecutor has produced factual report in relation to FIR

No.657/2021 of Police Station, Amba Mata, District Udaipur as

well as the case diary. The said factual report is taken on record.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

after going through the material available on record, I am of the

view that so far as relief (a) prayed in this writ petition is

concerned, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, no such direction of evicting any person

from any immovable property can be issued in routine manner.

Such direction, in the form of injunction, can be granted by the

competent civil court after taking into consideration the evidence

produced by respective parties in appropriate civil proceedings.

Moreover, so far as the respondent No.3 is concerned,

the petitioner himself, in the applications No.2/2021 and 3/2021,

came with a case that the respondent No.3 died issue-less leaving

behind no legal heir and the petitioner is exclusively the owner of

the property in question, therefore, there is no requirement of

issuance of any direction to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to get the

respondent No.3 evicted from the property in question.

So far as the relief (b) prayed in this writ petition is

concerned, it is noticed that pursuant to the complaints filed by

the petitioner in the year 2019, the police have already registered

(5 of 5) [CRLW-458/2019]

the FIR No.657/2021 at Police Station, Amba Mata, Udaipur and

investigation in the same is going on. Even if the petitioner is

having any apprehension that the police authorities will not allow

him to enter into the premises in question, he is free to initiate

civil or criminal proceeding against the police authorities before

concerned civil/criminal court. The petitioner can also approach

the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur against any such action by

the police authorities by moving appropriate representation. It is

expected that if any such representation is filed by the petitioner

before the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur, the same shall be

considered objectively and if so required, the Superintendent of

Police, Udaipur may issue necessary directions in it.

In view of the above observations, I do not find any

merit in this writ petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed.

Stay petition also stands dismissed.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J masif/-PS

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)