- (1.) G. P. Mathnr, J. This petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C. has been filed for quashing the proceedings initiated under Section 145 (1), Cr. P. C.
(2.) THE applicant Surendra Singh Chowdhary claims that he is allottee of shop bearing No. 33 situate at Jaipur House, Agra from Agra Development Authority and that be took possession of the said shop on 18-4 -. 975. According to the applicant, he is regularly paying the rent of the shop to the Development Authority and he is running his law chamber in the premises. Since, Aditya Prakash Sharma opp-party No. 3 threatened to dispossess the applicant from the disputed shop, he filed a civil suit bearing No. 260 of 1991 in the Court of Munsif, Agra against Opp-party No. 3 for injunction restraining him from taking forcible possession of the shop in dispute and on 19-3-1991 an injunction order was passed in his favour. On 17-3-1991, two F, I. Rs' were lodged under Section 395 I. P. C. at P. S. Loha Mandi, one by applicant and the other by opposite party No. 3, which were registered as Crime Nos. 74 of 1991 and 74-A of 1991. THE police of P. S. Loha Mandi gave a report before the Addl. City Magistrate, Agra on 18-3-1991 for initiating proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. THE police of P. S. Loha Mandi sealed the shop as there was tension between the parties who both claimed to be in possession of the disputed shop. THE learned Addl. City Magistrate, 1st. passed a preli minary order on 20-3-1991 under Section 145 (1), Cr. P. C. and directed the parties to appear before him on 5-4-1991. Although, in the present petition, a prayer has been made for quashing of the proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. , but at the time of hearing of application, the learned counsel for the applicant made a statement that at this stage, he was only challenging the action of the police in locking the shop and getting it sealed. The learned counsel also made a statement that he was not pressing the petition for any other relief, I am therefore, confining my order to the limited question of locking of the shop by the police. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the police has no power to lock and get an immovable property sealed without any order of a competent Court. He has further contended that even before submitting the report to the Magistrate on 18-3-91 for initiating procesdings under Section 145 Cr. P. C. , the police has locked the shop and sealed the same which will be evident from the report itself, copy of which has been filed as Annexure 9 to the petition. It is also contended that the applicant had moved an application before the learned Addl. City Magistrate on 1-4-1991 for getting the shop opened, but no order has been passed on the same. The applicant was having his chamber in the said shop and on account of closure by the police, he was suffering great hardship as his books and files etc. have been locked.
(3.) ON 16-4-1991, learned State Counsel was directed to file counter-affidavit and the case was ordered to be listed for admission on 2-4-1991. The State has, however, not filed any counter-affidavit till today. In my opi nion, the contention raised by the learned counsel is well founded. The police report dated 18- 3-91 (Annescure-9 to the petition) sbows that even before making the report to the learned Magistrate for initiating proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. , the police had sealed the shop in question. The Code of Criminal Procedure does not counter any such power upon the police to lock and seal an immovable property while submitting a report for initiation of proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. The learned Magistrate after passing preliminary order under Section 145 (1) Cr. P. C. could have passed an order of attachment under Section 146 (1), Cr. P. C. , if he was satisfied that the case was one of emergency. However, in the present case, even before the Magistrate passed the preliminary order under Section 145 (1), Cr. P. C. on 20-3-91, shop was locked and sealed by the police. This action of the police is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction. The application is, accordingly allowed and the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to open the shop No. 33, situate at Jaipur House, Agra. It may be clarified that the order passed by me will not affect any order passed either by the learned Magistrate in proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. or by the Civil Court in suits filed by either party or by some other competent Court. In case, any order of attachment has been passed by the learned Magis trate under Section 146 (1) Cr. P. C. or by the Civil Court in the suit, the same shall be given effect to. It may also be clarified that in this petition, I have considered only a limited question as to the action of the police in locking the shop or getting it sealed even before submitting report for initiation of pro ceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. I am expressing no opinion on the merits of proceedings which have been initiated under Section 145, Cr. P. C. by the Addl. City Magistrate, Agra.;