Allowed

Hakam Chand @ Hakim Chand v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC16 May 2019CRM-M/19381/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana accepted a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. regarding a land dispute. Despite revenue officers stating demarcation was impossible due to joint ownership, the court directed the State to take action on the petitioner's FIR lodged after alleged harassment and alleged illegal occupation of land.

What did the court decide?

Relief granted: The petitioner's petition is accepted, and the respondent-State is directed to take the required action on the Day-to-Day Register No. 28 dated 23.10.2017, registered under various IPC

Hakam Chand @ Hakim Chand Vs State of Punjab and… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh

¶2

Criminal Misc. No. M-19381 of 2018

¶3

Date of Decision: 16.05.2019

¶4

Hakam Chand alias Hakim Chand

¶5

... Petitioner(s)

¶6

Versus State of Punjab and Others

¶7

... Respondent(s)

¶8

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shekher Dhawan. Present: Ms. Arti, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

¶9

Mr. Rajat Bansal, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for respondents No.1 to 4.

¶10

Mr. C.M.Munjal, Advocate for respondents No.5 & 6.

¶11

Shekher Dhawan, J.

¶12

Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 to 4 to arrest the accused in cross case on the basis of DDR No. 28 dated 23.10.2017, registered under Sections 452, 323, 324, 506, 148 & 149 IPC (Sections 448 & 380 IPC were added lateron) at Police Station Guru Harsahai, District Ferozepur.

¶13

As per petitioner, he along with his family are residing peacefully in village Bajeke, Tehsil Guru Harsahai, District Ferozepur. One of his sons is 90% disabled and suffering from polio disease. Petitioner and his elder son are working as Submersible Motor Repair Mechanics. He owned five marlas of land on which a shop had already been constructed. DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ2019.05.16 14:27 Now the family of petitioner has started construction work to build their I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶14

Criminal Misc. No. M-19381 of 2018 2

¶15

house on the said five marlas plot. This plot is adjoining the newly built villa of respondent No.5-Kashmir Singh, who is Ex-Sarpanch of the village and close to the congress M.L.A. Respondents No.5 & 6 were harassing the petitioner and wanted to grab his small land.

¶16

On 12.10.2017, when the petitioner was working on the plot, his daughter-in-law was brutally injured and other members of his family also got injuries. Respondents No.5 & 6 along with musclemen grabbed all the construction material, motors and all other articles from the shop of the petitioner. They had also given beatings to his handicapped son; looted the construction and other material amounting to Rs.15,00,000/-; also ran JCB machine on the plot of the petitioner and broken all the construction material. However, despite doing all that, respondents No. 5 & 6, in connivance with the police and other political persons, lodged FIR against the petitioner and his family members. Petitioner's complaint was registered after ten days of the incident as a cross-case. The police is not taking any action despite seven months having been passed and as such present petition before this Court.

¶17

Learned counsel for respondents contended that present case is based on revenue record. As per the revenue record and investigation having been done in this case, land in question belongs to respondents No.5 & 6 where petitioner wants to raise some construction. Tehsildar, Guru Harsahai had conducted the demarcation of the property in dispute and as such, present petition be dismissed.

¶18

Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2019.05.16 14:27 the parties and appraisal of the record of the case and as per short affidavit, I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

Criminal Misc. No. M-19381 of 2018 3

¶20

filed by Gurjit Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Guru Har Sahai dated 18.03.2019, an application was filed before the Tehsildar by the Station House Officer, Police Station Guru Har Sahai on 21.08.2018. At that time, the application was returned by the Tehsildar with the objection that property in question is situated in the joint khewat and due to jointness, demarcation cannot be conducted and a copy thereof is Annexure R1/T on the file. However, reports submitted by Patwari, Kanungo and Tehsildar are as under:-

¶21

“Respected sir,

¶22

It is respectfully submitted that the record of Patwari Halqua of the above said khasra number has been examined. The above said khevat is undivided and belongs to all. Due to this reason, the demarcation cannot be done. The applicant should get the partition first. Thereafter, demarcation can be done. So that the orders be complied carefully. Report is submitted.

Sd/- Patwari

Sd/- Kanugo

Dated 27.08.2018

No. 242/r/II dated 27.8.18

¶27

It is written to the SHO by sending this report that as pr the report of above said Kanugo the record has been conducted. There is joint khata as per letter. Khevat belongs to all, due to this reason, the demarcation cannot be done. Report of Kanugo mentioned in letters.

¶28

DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2019.05.16 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶29

Criminal Misc. No. M-19381 of 2018 4

¶30

Sd/- Tehsildar”

¶31

The case of petitioner is also to the extent that khasra No. 33//25, as per jamabandi for the year 2014-15 of village Bajeke bearing khewat No. 515/489 and khatauni Nos. 676, 677, 678 & 679, petitioner is a co-sharer. As per petitioner, his father had constructed shop in the said land and he is running his business there and electricity connection is also in his name. The said shop has been illegally demolished by respondents No. 5 & 6.

¶32

In the light of above facts, present petition stands accepted. The respondent-State is directed to take the required action on DDR No. 28 dated 23.10.2017, registered under Sections 452, 323, 324, 506, 148 & 149 IPC (Sections 448 & 380 IPC were added lateron) lodged by the petitioner.

¶33

( Shekher Dhawan) Judge May 16, 2019 “DK” Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶34

DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2019.05.16 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Hakam Chand @ Hakim Chand v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hakam Chand @ Hakim Chand v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kohari Devi and Others Vs State of Haryana

Dalbir Singh @ Kala and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Pawan Sharma Vs U.T., Chandigarh

Jagdish Singh @ Gurjant @ Janta Vs State of Punjab and Others

Pardeep Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Gopal Paswan Vs State of Punjab