Back
2022 Supreme(Del) 1360
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.
Yashpal Sehrawat & Anr. - Appellantss
Versus
State Of NCT Of Delhi & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(Crl) No. 395/2020
Decided On : 10-02-2022
Mr. Arun Khatri, Mr. Amit Kumar, Mr. Vikas Verma, Mr. Rishabh Kalani And Ms. Kriti Krishna, Advs., for the Appellant; Mr. Avi Singh, Asc for the State with Mr. Divyanshu Sharma, Adv., for the Respondent.
The court emphasized the importance of pending civil adjudication and the availability of efficacious remedies for addressing grievances.
Headnote:
Exemption - Registration of FIR - W.P.(Crl) No. 395/2020 - Section 107/150 Cr. P.C, 145 Cr.P.C
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a direction for the registration of FIR against police officials and claimed compensation for an incident. The police had gone to the spot on receipt of a complaint and acted accordingly. The civil suit regarding the land in question is pending adjudication.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no directions were required to be passed as the civil suit was pending adjudication and the police had acted on receipt of a complaint. The court held that the petitioners have an efficacious remedy for getting their grievances redressed.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's request for the registration of FIR against police officials and the claim for compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided that no directions were required to be passed as the civil suit was pending adjudication and the police had acted on receipt of a complaint. The court emphasized that the petitioners have an efficacious remedy for getting their grievances redressed.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. - Crl. M.A. No. 2955/2020 (for exemption)
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(Crl) No. 395/2020
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction for registration of FIR with regard to the incident dated 1.2.2020 against the respondent/police officials.
2. The petitioner has also claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 5 crores from the respondents.
3. In brief, the facts of the case are that in the intervening night of 21/22.12.2019, complainant Ganga Ram, son of Sh. Balak Ram filed a complaint vide DD No. 24B dated 19.12.2019 in the police station Vasant Kunj South. In the complaint, it was alleged that some persons including the petitioner no.l were trying to construct a boundary wall at the land in question, by virtue of which, SI Bhagwan Singh along with staff rushed to the spot i.e Khasra No. 1192, 1193, 1236 and 1237/1, Village Rangpuri, Near Shamshan Bhumi, New Delhi where one other person namely Rishipal, brother of the petitioner no.l met and after that all of them including some other ladies belonging to their respective families who were also present at the spot started quarrelling with each other and had very hot arguments among on the issue that which part of the above said land belongs to which party and were threatening each other in abusive language creating nuisance in the vicinity. All the above mentioned persons were showing their possession over the land and were threatening each other for dire consequences. Hence keeping in view the prevailing circumstances action under Section 107/150 Cr. P.C and 145 Cr.P.C was initiated in the matter. At the time of initiating the action all the parties were directed to maintain the status quo in the disputed land till the disposal of the matter before the concerned court.
4. Counsel for the petitioner has argued on the lines of this petition. He further submitted that because of high handedness of the police officials of P.S.Vasant Kunj South the petitioners and their family members have suffered. He further argued that the police officials have used force against the ladies and minor children of the family of the petitioners and they had apprehended the ladies and took them to P.S. Vasant Kunj and kept them in illegal custody.
5. On the other hand, it is submitted by learned Additional Standing Counsel that no relief as prayed by the petitioner can be granted. He further submitted that the petitioners have got equal efficacious remedy and if he is aggrieved by any act of the respondent, he can approach the Magistrate for redressal.
6. He further submitted that as far as question of compensation is concerned, the petitioners have remedy for filing suit for damages and no such directions should be passed in the present petition.
7. State has filed the status report. I have perused the status report. The following para is relevant in the status report which reads as follow:
"That on 01/02/2020 a PCR call vide DD No. 31A regarding quarrel was received at PS Vasant Kunj South which was entrusted to HC Ashok No. 197/SW who along with his accompanying Constable went to the place of information i.e. at Kh. No. 1192, 1193, 1236, 1237/1, Rangpuri, Near Shamshan Ghat, New Delhi, where he found that few persons were quarrelling with each other over a dispute of land. Further he informed vide DD No. 32B and requested for more police staff including lady staff for his assistance. In pursuance of above information more police staff including lady officers rushed to the spot and it was found that some persons were demolishing the construction and some were trying to construct the new one. It was also noticed that it was the same land wherein an action u/s 145 Cr. P.C and 107/150 Cr.PC had already been taken, wherein all the parties were directed to maintain status quo till the disposal of the matter before the concerned court but on inspecting the site it was found that there was some constructio
