- (1.) M. Katju, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioner has sprayed for a mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to take action against guilty police personnel and to pay damages to the petitioner. The petitioner claims to be owner of Vehicle No. U. P. 66/9908 (Tata Sumo ). True copy of the registration certificate is Annexure-1. It is alleged in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the petition that on 30-10- 2002 the said vehicle was being driven by driver Ravi Shanker Giri who was carrying passengers from Varanasi to Allahabad. When the driver was passing through Police Station, Mirzamurad, Varanasi the S. H. O. stopped the vehicle and threatened the driver to get out all the passengers and to park the vehicle in police station premises. The S. H. O. then allegedly took the vehicle and travelled to Patna. The vehicle of the petitioner that was in possession of the police party met with an accident in Police Station, Moghulsarai, district Chandauli. The S. H. O. lodged an FIR vide Annexure-3. The driver of the petitioner came in the evening on 31-10-2002 and informed the petitioner about the accident. On 1-11-2002 the petitioner reached to Police Station, Mirzamurad and enquired about the unlawful detention of his vehicle and he was informed that the vehicle has met with an accident. The petitioner went to the place of the accident and inspected the vehicle and found that it has been totally destroyed and hence he claimed damage estimated to be Rs. 2,75,000. A photostat copy of the estimate is Annexure- 4. The petitioner approached the Station Officer, MIrzamurad and gave a written complaint but the petitioner was threatened not to make any complaint against the S. H. O. otherwise he will face dire consequences. The petitioner made an application to the S. S. P. , Varanasi dated 20-11-2002 for taking action against the guilty police personnel. The petitioner claims to be an Ex-military-man and he has become handicapped. A true copy of the certificate is Annexure-6. In para 15 of the petition it is alleged that the vehicle of the petitioner has been fully destroyed and the petitioner is suffering average monthly loss of Rs. 27,000. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the S. H. O. Rama Nand Yadav. It has been alleged in para 5 of the same that on 30-10- 2002 the said vehicle was hired from the driver for a sum of Rs. 1500 for going to Mughalsarai but due to misfortune the said vehicle met what an accident in which the deponent and other police men were seriously injured and in this connection in First Information Report had been lodged. In para 8 of the counter- affidavit it is stated that the vehicle was not unlawfully detained but it was hired for a sum of Rs. 1500. In para 9 of the counter-affidavit it is stated that it is wrong to say that there was damage of Rs. 2,75,000. A charge-sheet has been filed vide Annexure C. A.-2. In para 15 it is stated that there was no fault of the deponent or any other police personnel.
(3.) IN our opinion the petitioner should file a civil suit for his claim of damages, as there factual controversies in this case which may require taking of evidence. If the suit is filed, the same shall be decided expeditiously. However, we direct the S. S. P. Varanasi to make an enquiry into the allegations of the petitioner and if they are found correct, action should be taken against the police personnel because such acts tarnish the image of the police. With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed off. Petition disposed of. .;