( 1 ) A question of considerable importance is raised by Mr. D. K. Shah the learned Counsel for the petitioner by urging that any member of the State Police functioning either under the Bombay Police Act 1951 or under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 or under any other law for the time being in force has no authority of law to deprive any citizen of his actual possession of the residential premises in the name and garb of Bonafide Police Investigation when two rival claimants approach the police and make complaints that each of the two rival claimants is entitled to possess the actual physical possession of the residential premises. In substance the debated point at the bar is that if under the circumstances the State police adopts a partisan attitude under the colour of its office and authority and takes steps in favour of one of the claimants to the prejudice and detriment of the other the only inevitable inference is that the State Police acts with requisite mala fides and thereby exceeds beyond the statutory circumscribed limits of law and consequently compels the actual possessor of the residential premises to submit not to rule of law but to the rule of ancient primitive ages which is thoroughly alien to the present set up of a civilised democratic society.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the point raised by Mr. Shah a few relevant facts may be stated.

( 3 ) THE petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 read with Article 31 of the Constitution of India and in substance prayed that the respondents viz. the Additional Commissioner of Police the Inspector of Police and others should be directed to remove the seals affixed on the petitioners residential premises forthwith and to quit from the possession of the petitioners premises. The petitioner also prayed for a direction that the respondents should not disturb the petitioners possession of the premises in question except under an order of any competent Court. The petitioner also prayed for certain interim reliefs as set out in paragraph 12 (iii) and (iv) of the petition.

( 4 ) BY way of an amendment the petitioner also prayed that respondents Nos. 1 to 3 i. e. the State of Gujarat and the police officers should be directed to restore him the goods articles and documents removed by them from the premises of the petitioner and to further direct them to place the same in the premises from where they were removed. He also prayed for a declaration that the police action of taking possession of the premises and sealing the same was illegal and without authority. He also prayed that the Executive Magistrate should be directed not to proceed with the proceedings taken by the police under sec. 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner also prayed for a direction that the respondents should be directed to restore him the possession of the premises as they were on 8-00 P. M. on 19-6-1978.

( 5 ) THE material averments for the disposal of the present petition are as follows ;it was the case of the petitioner that at the relevant time he was occupying two rooms owned by Smt. Indumati Ambubhai Ravani respondent No. 5 herein and situated at 2 Ellora Park Society Near Naranpura Char Rasta Ahmedabad-13. It is also averred in the petition that at the relevant time the petitioner was also occupying the Government Quarters allotted to him at Gandhinagar. He states in his petition that he was occupying the aforesaid premises at Ahmedabad on a monthly rent at Rs 100/- and that he was regularly paying the rent to respondent No. 5. He also states in his petition that he had to pay the consolidated tax and education cess payable to the Municipal Corporation and that he was paying the same.

( 6 ) THE gravaman of the petitioners accusation is that on June 19 1978 at about 8-30 P. M. when he was at his place some police officers including Shri Jaspalsingh Additional Commissioner of Police Ahmedabad and Shri Desai respondents Nos. 2 and 3 respectively came