- (1.) B. S. Chauhan, J. This criminal writ petition has been filed for issuing a direction to the respondent No. 6 to lodge and register the FIR of the petitioner under Section 154 (1) Cr. P. C. and to investigate the matter and to restore the possession of the premises in dispute, alongwith books, general files and stationeries etc.
(2.) THE petitioner, in person, an Advocate of this Court has submitted that he came into possession of two rooms, kitchen, latrine and bathroom in the first floor of House No. 28-D/1, Khalasi Line, Kydganj, Allahabad by an oral agreement of tenancy at the rate of Rs. 200 per month as rent in December, 1999. He asked for the issuance of the rent receipt in December 2000 for the first time, but the landlady- respondent No. 8 refused to issue the same, however he regularly paid the rent every month. In the month of December 2002 the landlady-respondent No. 8 stopped receiving the rent. Thus the petitioner approached the Civil Court by filling application under Section 30 (1) of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972, wherein the rent was deposited upto April 2003. In spite of paying the rent regularly, he has forcibly been dispossessed by the landlady-respondent No. 8 in collusion with the police authorities on 29th May, 2003. Petitioner tried his best to get the FIR lodged, but in vain. Hence, this petition for aforesaid reliefs. The learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 8 and 9 have submitted that the petitioner had executed a rent deed (Annexure-2-CA) which was duly notorised and he agreed to pay the rent at the rate of Rs. 1,800 per month. However, the petitioner did not pay any rent whatsoever and started harassing the landlady threatening her with dire consequences merely being an Advocate stating that he was the law unto himself and could do whatever he wanted to do. Being aggrieved the landlady wrote several complaints to the Secretary Bar Council of U. P. , Hon'ble Chief Justice of this Court and to other authorities, copies of which have been filed as Annexure CA-3. Subsequently, large number of persons intervened and a written compromise was reached on 25-5-2003 between the parties which was reduced in writing on a stamp paper, wherein the petitioner agreed to vacate the premises and pay the arrears of rent in instalments and the said compromise deed had been duly signed by the petitioner, several witnesses including two Advocates of this Court on behalf of the petitioner. In pursuance of the said compromise deed he vacated the tenanted premises and got another premises in the neighbourhood as House No. 212-A Krishna Nagar, Kydganj, Allahabad on rent and the rent agreement dated 25-5-2003 with the owner of the said house has also been filed as Annexure CA-5. Thus, according to the learned Counsel for the respondents petitioner willfully vacated the house and agreed to pay the arrears of rent in instalments and it is only to harass the landlady with the intention not to pay the arrears of rent, this petition has been filed.
(3.) IT is further submitted that petitioner has been guilty for concealing the material fact as he had filed a Writ Petition No. 1346 of 2003 earlier alleging that he was apprehending danger to his life from landlady for seeking police protection. This Court dismissed the said writ petition vide order dated 1st April, 2003, doubting the bona fides of the petitioner and holding that the writ petition was a rogue not to pay the rent and a misuse of his robes of being an Advocate. Therefore, in view of the above it is contended by the learned Counsel for the respondents that petition was liable to be rejected with a very heavy cost. The learned standing Counsel adopted the arguments taken by Shri S. K. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the landlady and further contented that presenting the writ petition in such a manner was nothing but an abuse of process of law and thus such a litigant should be dealt with a heavy hand by the Court.;