The court emphasized the distinction between cognizable and non-cognizable offences under Sections 323 and 324 of the IPC and the need for a Magistrate's order for investigation in the case of non-cognizable offences.

JUDGMENT :

VIBHU BAKHRU, J.

1. The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that FIR No. 311/2018, under Sections 323/324/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) registered with PS Narela and all proceedings emanating therefrom, be quashed. The petitioners further pray that directions be issued to ensure the safety and security of the petitioners from anti-social elements, including respondent nos. 2 and 3. In addition, the petitioners pray that the complaint filed by them with respect to the incident, which occurred on 29.04.2018, be investigated thoroughly by the police.

2. The petitioners claim that the FIR in question does not disclose any cognizable offence and therefore the same could not be registered.

3. Briefly stated, the essential facts necessary to address the controversy in the present petition are as under:

3.1 The FIR in question – FIR No. 311/2018 – was registered at the instance of respondent no. 2 on 29.04.2018. He had reported that he had a second home at H No. 368, near Dere Wali Chaupal, Pana Udyan, Narela, Delhi which he had rented nine months ago to petitioner no.2. He stated that the cheques given by petitioner no.2 as rent had bounced and thereafter, he was forced to give petitioner no.2 an ultimatum to pay the rent or vacate the house. This angered the petitioner no.2 who started threatening respondent no. 2 and stated that he would register false sexual harassment cases against him through his wife. He stated that on 29.04.2018, respondent no.2 had come with a mechanic to clean the outside drain of his house at 9:30 a.m. The petitioners started abusing him. They started beating him and petitioner no.1 had bit his hand. Thereafter, petitioner no.1 voluntarily hit her head on the wall and stated that she would file a false case against him.

3.2 Respondent no.2 stated that he had thereafter, called the police. He was taken to a hospital where he was treated for his wound. Thereafter, he filed the said FIR with reference to the abovementioned incident.

4. The petitioners contend that the facts stated in the abovementioned FIR are false and the same has been registered with the connivance of the police. The petitioners state that they had paid rent in advance to respondent no.2. However, respondent no. 2 along with his goons had been threatening the petitioners to vacate the rented property. They allege that respondent no.2 had removed the electricity meter and water supply illegally to coerce the petitioners to vacate the premises in question. The petitioners had previously complained to the police regarding respondent no.2, but no action had been taken. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have filed the present petition.

5. The petitioners have a different version of the incident that took place on 29.04.2018. The petitioners state that apprehending further violence by the respondents, they had written a complaint to the SHO, PS Narela, on 29.04.2018, seeking police protection. The petitioners allege that on that date, respondent nos. 2 and 3 had broken into the residence of the petitioners with swords and sticks with the intention to kill their family. They had sexually assaulted petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 and his family had been coerced to lock themselves up in a room. The petitioners state that on calling on the 100 number, the police had not come. Thereafter, the respondents wrecked the house of the petitioners and stole valuable property. The petitioners state that the police is in connivance with respondent nos. 2 and 3 and therefore, have not taken any action on the complaints filed by them. In this context the petitioners pray that directions be issued to the police to provide protection from the respondents and for the registration of their complaint dated 29.04.2018.

6. The status report has been filed wherein it is stated that on 01.04.2018, a complaint was received from petitioner no.2 stating that despite paying electricity bills, respondent no.2 (Ram Niwas Verma)