V.S. DAVE, J.—This Misc. petition has been field on behalf of the accused petitioners in Criminal Case No. 36/84 Beharilal vs. Ramotar pending in court of the Addititonal Chief Judical Magistrate, Neem-ka-Thana with prayer to quash the proceedings pending against them.

2. There is a chequered history of litigation between the parties in the instant case as is borne out from the complaint it self. The complainant non petitioners case starts with the compliant filed on 28.02.1983 for an incident alleged to have taken place on 16th February. 1983 wherein the complainant stated that in Neem-ka-thana town, he owned a half constructed shop near Kapilmurti in Kapil Mandi Adjecent to his shop of Gyarsilal, which is on rent with Ramotar accused, is situated. About this half constructed shop, a suit was filed by plaintiff against Gyarsilal and Ramotar for permanent injunction wherein accused No. 1 filed a reply to the effect that land belongs to Gyarsilal and on this a docree was obtained on 6.05.1976. Thereafter, on 28.12.1977. Ramotar trespassed into the shop, damaged and removed the debries for which the complainant Prabhulal filed a report before the Police on which the accused persons were charge-sheeted for offence u/ss. 147, 448, 427 and 379, IPC. Again there was some litigation as Gyarsilal placed hurdles and Ramotar raised some objections which were dismssed on 22-12-1976. There was yet another complaint filed for offence under sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC where in a charge-sheet was filed against Ramotar by the Police. One more objection of the execution of the decree was raised by Ramotar on 1-8-1977 which too was rejected. Ramotar, however, with the connivance of the Administrator, Municipal Board. Neem-ka-thana wrongfully obtained a patta and raised yet another objection on that strength which too was rejected on 15-10-1980. The Patta was obtained by playing fraud in conspiracy with the Administrator, Municipal Board for which also a criminal case is going on against the accused and the Administrator. It was thee alleged in the complaint that all the accused, who are eight in number, in pursuance of common object and by hatching a conspiracy decided to cause damage to the shop and that in case the complainant interferses, he may be done to death. Complainant on 10th Feb., 1983 moved the Dy. S, P. and on subsequent day the S.D.M., Neem-ka-thana but no action was taken, therefore he phoned to the Superintendent of Police, Sikar than personally met him at Sikar on 18th Feb., 1983 who in turn told him that he had phoned to the Dy. S.P. to get the shop attached in proceedings under section 145 Cr. P.C. but still nothing was done. On the same day the accused persons entered the shop damaged the shop in as much as even the slabs which were there in the shop were broken by spades. They took away the broken pieces of the stones slabs amounting to Rs. 200/- with them. Total loss was calculated by the complainant Rs: 1000/-. He explained the delay by stating that on 14th, 15th, 16.02.1983 complainant went to Jaipur and when he returned, he met the Police but the Police went on deferring the matter and when he found that nothing is being done thereafter, he filed this complaint. This complaint was filed for offence under sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 447, and 379/120-B, IPC. Along with this complaint, the complainant filed seven docu-ments which included the original Patta issued on 20-8-1961 in his favour, sale deed in favour of Gyarsi Lal dated 1-5-1963, photostat copy of the certificate issued by the Municipal Board date 10-12-1976, copy of the written-statements dated 24-9-1960 and 2-5-1963, copy of the decree dated 9-5-1976 and the site plan dated 1-3-1983. The complainant was registered and statements of Gyarsilal and complanant Beharilal were recorded. The learned Magistrate after recording the statements directed the case to be registered for offences under sections 448 and 427, IPC vide his order dated 4.04.1984. Accused p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document