SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 3967

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.
Gayatri Goyal – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
W.P.(Cr) 2369 of 2023
Decided On : 22-08-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Parmod Kumar Dubey, Senior Advocate with, Mr. Rinku Garg, Mr.Prashant Dahiya, Mr. Manik Bhalla, Ms. Pallavi Garg and Ms. Aditi, Advocates, for the Petitioners.
Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC for the State with Mr. Kunal Mittal, Advocate and with SI Murari Krishan, PS New Friends Colony.
Ms. Sima Gulati, Advocate with Ms. Revati Gulati and Ms. Diksha Narula, Advocates, for the Respondent-6 to 8.

The central legal point established in the judgment is that ownership and possession disputes require evidence and trial to be settled, and the role of police officials in such disputes is not crystalized until proven during the trial.

Headnote:

Property Dispute - Quashing of FIR - Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, Section 482 Cr.P.C. - IPC 380/453/448/506/34 - [Anamallai Club Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu & Ors., (1997 (3) SCC 169); Vidya Devi Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, ((2020) 2 SCC 569); Sukh Dutt Ratra & Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, ((2022) 7 sec 508]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking to quash an FIR and take action against police officials and respondents in a property dispute over ownership and possession of a property in New Delhi. The petitioners alleged that the respondents were misusing power and law to restrain them from entering their property.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the dispute was a matter of evidence and trial, and rejected the petitioners' requests to quash the FIR and take action against the police officials. The court emphasized that the ownership and possession dispute required evidence to be settled.

Issues: The issues revolved around the ownership and possession of the property, misuse of power and law by police officials, and the validity of the FIRs filed by both parties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the ownership and possession dispute required evidence and trial, and that the police officials' role was not yet clear. The court also emphasized that the judgments cited by the petitioners were not applicable to the present case.

Final Decision: The petition lacked merits and was dismissed by the court.

JUDGMENT

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. (Oral)

CRL.M.A. 22232/2023

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 2369/2023

3. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioners with the following prayers:

"i. Quash the FIR No. 187/2023 being registered as the misuse of power and law by the police officials of PS New Friend Colony at the behest and in connivance with Respondent No. 6-8.

ii. Direct immediate suspension and strict action against the erring police officials i.e., Respondent No. 4 & 5 and/or any other police officer it involved in the present matter.

iii. Direct Departmental/Vigilance inquiry against the erring police officials i.e., Respondent No.4 & 5 and/or any other police officer involved in the present matter.

iv. Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction declaring that the acts of Respondents are contrary to law and impose strict actions against them.

v. Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction directing all the Respondents from not restraining the Petitioners to enter and enjoy their property bearing no. A-271, Ground Floor, New Friends Colony, New Delhi-11 0025 as Petitioners are the rightful and true owners of the said plot/floor and also not to be forced to enter into settlement with regards the FIR No. 190/2011 at PS-New Friend Colony.

vi. Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction directing the Respondent/Police Authorities to conduct fair and impartial investigation in various complaints filed by the Petitioners.

vii. Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction directing the Respondents/Police Authorities to not to threaten the Petitioners and to pressurize them in order to settle all the disputes between the parties. Pass such other order(s) as deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

4. In brief the facts of the case, as alleged by the petitioner, are that property bearing no. A-271, Ground Floor, New Friend Colony, New Delhi was sold through a registered Sale Deed by Smt. Sheela Devi (respondent no. 6 herein) to Smt. Gayatri Goyal (petitioner no. 1 herein) on 15.12.2009 along with a possession letter in favour of Gayatri Goyal. It is further alleged that the petitioners filed a criminal complaint with regard to the forged and fabricated MOU dated 15.12.2009 created by Kapil Garg (respondent no. 7 herein) and as a result, FIR no. 190/2011 at PS New Friend Colony dated 24.08.2011 under Section 420 IPC was registered after the orders of the Court. It is further alleged that in order to cover their own frivolous story, Kapil Garg also filed a cross FIR no. 221/2011 dated 15.09.2011 at PS New Friend Colony against the Petitioners. It is further alleged that Smt. Sheela Devi and her sons namely Kapil Garg (respondent no. 7 herein) and Romi Garg (respondent no. 8 herein) in order to take back the property illegally and fraudulently, Kapil Garg filed a frivolous suit based upon a forged and fabricated MOU. It is further alleged that another Civil Suit no. 716/2012 was filed by Smt Sheela Devi alleging that the sale deed was executed by Petitioners by misrepresentation. Thereafter, in the said civil suit, status quo order was passed by the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 23.03.2012 and 04.04.2014 respectively. It is further alleged that the said suit came to be dismissed for non-prosecution in January 2023 and after that the said property was taken over by the Petitioners as they had a sale deed in their favour with a possession letter of the property. Thereafter on 09.06.2023, FIR No. 187/2023 registered at PS New Friend Colony under Section 380/453/448/506/34 of IPC against the petitioners.

5. Learned senio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top