( 1 ) THIS is petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying that the proceedings under section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, pending in the Court of Kumari L. Khiangte, Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Patel Nagar, be quashed.

( 2 ) PETITIONER No. I Maya Devi, is the owner of a house No. E-39, Kii Nagar, New Delhi. Petitioner No. 2 and petitioner No. 4, 0m Parkash Sikka and his wife respectively are the son and daughter-in-law of Maya Devi. Ramji Dass Kapur, Petitioner No. 3 is the attorney of Maya Devi. The respondent, Bhagat Singh Bedi, is a tenant in a part of the abovementioned premises.

( 3 ) IT is perhaps pertinent to place the background of this case, which is chequered. Maya Devi went abroad to live with her son, who was posted outside India. Some time in October, 1979 Maya Devi, through her attorney, Ramji Dass Kapur, let out a part of the said first floor premises to Mr P P. Talwar. The portion let out on the first floor consisted of three rooms) one kitchen, bath room and two toilets. From the application under section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 and the map annexed thereto, it was apparent that one bed room on the first floor measuring 13 x 13. 6 with a store annexed measuring 3. 6 x 9 . 4 was retained by the landlady. Subsequently, as the premises were no longer required by Mr. Talwar, the premises were let out to Mr. Inderpal Singh Bedi (since deceased)/bhagat Singh Bedi on 8th December, 1979. The abovementioned room with attached store continued to remain locked and in the possession of the landlady.

( 4 ) SOMETIME in the middle of May, 1981 Maya Devi returned to India with her son and daughter-in-law. It is asserted by her that she utilized the room and attached store. However) on 3rd August, 1981 it appears that when Mr. 0m Parkash Sikka went to the first floor to go to the said room where their goods were kept he was prevented from entering and threatened.

( 5 ) AS a result, Maya Devi lodged a report with the police station, Moti Nagar on 4th August, 1981. According to the report, Maya Devi had Stored some other goods in the said room and locked it in June, 1977 when she had gone to Kuwait. Thereafter when they returned to India on 15th May, 1981, they had found their luggage intact and had been using this room. It was only on 3rd August, 1981 at about 8 a. m. that her son was prevented from entering.

( 6 ) IT appears that thereafter the tenant put his own lock over the lock of the landlady on the door of the said room.

( 7 ) ON 12th August, 1981, Bhagat Singh Bedi filed a suit against Maya Devi, being suit No. 351 of 1981 for a permanent injunction restraining her and her family members and others from dispossessing him from the tenancy premises. In the said suit Bhagat Singh Bedi alleged that he was a tenant of the entire first floor premises, which comprised of four rooms (not three) apart from the kitchen, toilets etc. In the said suit a local commissioner was appointed to visit the said first floor premises and to report with regard to the possession of the premises and to make a rough site plan.

( 8 ) ON 13th August, 1981 Mr. Kailash Gambhir, the local commissioner went to the premises at about 5. 15 p. m. Maya Devi informed him that one bed room, shown in red colour in the rough site plan, was in her exclusive possession and was never given to the tenant. According to her a passage leading to the room and the rear court-yard were common and could be used by both the parties. Bhagat Singh Bedi, however, claimed that the entire first floor including that bed room, passage and rear courtyard were in his tenancy.

( 9 ) THE local commissioner found as a fact two locks on the door of the disputed room: one belonging to the landlady and the other belong to the tenant. On the respective locks being opened, the local commissioner noted the items lying in this room. They consisted of a dewan, a double bed with bed sheets stretched on it, a steel almirah, a dressin