SURYA PARTAP SINGH , J. (Oral):

The extraordinary jurisdiction vested in this Court by virtue of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been invoked by the petitioners for quashing of FIR No.139 dated 08.06.2018, Police Station Meharban, District Ludhiana. The above mentioned FIR has been lodged for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 182, 384, 385, 511 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, hereinafter being referred to as ‘IPC’ only, on the basis of a complaint submitted by ‘Gurcaran Singh’, the complainant-respondent No.2.

2. It has been alleged by the complainant-respondent No.2 that he is Chairman of G.D.S. Convent School and that his son ‘Mohan Singh’ had purchased a piece of land vide sale deed No.25.08.2015, duly registered by the Sub-Registrar Ludhiana, on payment of entire sale consideration. As per complainant-respondent No.2 on 25.08.2015 when his son was raising construction of school’s office over the above mentioned piece of land, ‘Amarjeet Arora’ (petitioner No.1 herein) called the police by dialing police helpline No.100 and reached the spot along with son ‘Sanjeev Arora’ (petitioner No.2 herein), his wife and ‘Brij Mohan’. According to complainant respondent No.2 the above named petitioners and their associates claimed that the office was being constructed over the plot owned by them. The complainant-respondent No.2 further alleged that the matter was brought to the notice of higher authorities who called both the parties along with their documents, to the police station, but the petitioners did not turn-up. The complainant-respondent No.2 further alleged that instead of participating in the above mentioned proceedings on 29.08.2015, the petitioners got published a news item in the Newspaper, namely ‘Jagbani’, wherein the complainant respondent No.2 was projected as land mafia and a prayer was made to the Commissioner of Police to look into the matter.

3. According to complainant-respondent No.2 in view of above mentioned news item the matter was got investigated by the Commissioner of Police and the report was submitted on 31.08.2015 to the Commissioner of Police, wherein it was found that the allegations were false. The complainant respondent No.2 further alleged that thereafter by using the above mentioned newspaper-clip a civil suit was filed for injunction by the petitioners, and thereafter, the second representation was submitted before the Commissioner of Police on 17.11.2015 and third representation on 26.11.2015. As per complainant-respondent No.2 with regard to above mentioned two representations, also, the inquiries were conducted and both the above mentioned representations were found to be false.

4. In addition to above, the complainant-respondent No.2 further alleged that with an intention to extort money the petitioners had sought information under Right to Information Act and that they also demanded Rs.50,00,000/- from the complainant-respondent No.2 and threatened that if the money was not paid they would continue to harass the complainant respondent No.2 in the same manner and would ensure that he (complainant respondent No.2) would have to close his school.

5. It is the case of the prosecution that on the basis of above mentioned complaint formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken up.

6. Heard.

7. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that filing of FIR by the police for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 182, 384, 385, 511 and 120-B of IPC is nothing but a sheer abuse of process of law, and therefore, there is need for exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction vested in this Court. According to learned counsel for the petitioners firstly, on the face of it the allegations contained in the FIR are false and secondly, on the basis of contents of above mentioned FIR no case for the commission of offence under Section 182, 384, 385, 511 and 120-B of IPC is made out.

8. With regard to above, learned counsel for the petitioners has contended