S. Muralidhar, J.

.1. These petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) challenge two Kalandaras arising out of the same set of events. The first is titled State v. Asha Pant And Anr. and the other is titled State v. Kanwal Chaudhri and Anr. both pending in the court of Special Executive Magistrate (SEM), New Delhi and the notices issued to the petitioners in each of the petitions under Sections 107 and 111 CrPC.

2. The events leading to the filing of the present case, as stated in the petition Crl.M.C. No. 2077 of 2006, is that the property at 10A Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi (hereinafter the property) was owned by Mrs. Kanwal Chaudhri, the Petitioner No. 1 in Crl. M.C. 2416-17 of 2006. Mr. Ranjan Pant , the husband of Mrs. Asha Pant, the petitioner in Crl.M.C. No. 2077 of 2006, purchased a portion of the said property from Mrs. Kanwal Chaudhri on 8th July, 2002. It is stated that Mrs. Asha Pant and her husband stay out of Delhi most of the time as they are engaged in consultation business. Although according to Mrs. Pant things were peaceful soon after the purchase of the portion of the property, she was surprised when some time in 2003 Mrs. Chaudhri filed a Civil Suit No. 1447 of 2003 against her claiming that she was the owner of the entire first floor including the appurtenances to the portion sold by her to Mr.Pant. This led to further cases filed by one party against the other. Mr. Pant filed Suit No. 1453 of 2003 in this Court against Mrs. Chaudhri. Mrs. Chaudhri filed Complaint Case No. 1406/1 of 2003before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (MM) against Mr. Pant in which he was summoned. Mr. Pant filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 335 of 2004 in which a stay of the above Criminal Complaint case was granted. Consequent upon an order by the learned MM under Section 156 (3) CrPC, FIR No. 126 of 2004 was registered against Mr.Pant. This led to the filing of another Criminal Writ Petition No. 1334 of 2004 by him in this Court. The said writ petition was listed for final disposal on 21st February, 2005.

.3. On 31st March 2006 Mrs. Chaudhri complained to the police about a quarrel that took place between her and some unknown person in relation to an attempted trespass on the property. It appears that Mrs. Pant too gave a complaint at the same time as is evident from the following entry in DD No. 21A was recorded by ASI Naubat Ram, Police Station Tilak Marg at 7.45 pm on 31st March, 2006:

.That Smt. Kanwal Chaudri and Smt. Pant submitted their respective complaints in writing to Additional SHO that civil and criminal cases are pending between both the parties and both of them keep on complaining against each other- No cognizable offence is found to take place hence DD No. 11-A is filed.

4. According to Smt. Asha Pant within 24 hours of the aforementioned DD, another DD entry No. 12A dated 1st April, 2006 was recorded at her instance when she informed the police that somebody who had forcibly entered the property had been detained by her.

.5. Turning to the narration in Crl. M.C. No. 2416 of 2006, Petitioner No. 1 Mrs. Chaudhri does not dispute that the first floor of the premises was sold by her to Mr. Ranjan Pant. She states that the remaining portion of the property and the second floor was owned and used by her. According to her the Pants had started claiming exclusive rights to the common staircase and in the process often obstructed the passage hampering the usage of the same by Mrs.Chaudhri and her employees on some pretext or the other. She also adverted to the fact that a civil suit for injunction was filed by her in this Court which is pending adjudication. She also acknowledges that Mr. Pant had filed a suit.

6. According to Mrs. Chaudhri on 31st March 2006, Mrs. Pant had placed an almirah at the front of the staircase and also occupied a certain area on the top portion of the staircase in front of the servant quarters, in violation of the status quo order. It is then state