Sandeep MEHTA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioners by way of this misc. petition are seeking quashing of the F.l.R. No. 361/2005 of the Police Station, Nagaur for the offences under Sections 143,447, 336 and 323 l.P.C. Briefly stated facts of the case, are that the complainant/respondent Mohd. Aslam lodged a report at the Police Station, Nagaur alleging inter alia that on 27.8.2005, he after taking police aid went to repair and clean the house and land allegedly owned by his father located near Sindhalon-ki-Masjid. When the labourers started to remove stones from the land, Munmtaz Khan (petitioner/accused) along with other accused named in the F.l.R. started throwing stones on the members of the complainant party from the roof of his house. THE police personnel and the complainant took shelter to save themselves from the stone pelting. After that, the accused party entered into the land owned by the complainant. When resistance was given to the illegal entries of the accused, Mumtaz and Dildar gave beating to Mohd. Asfaque, brother of the complainant. THE neighbourers and the complainant intervened on which the accused threatened them of more beating. THE aforementioned report of this incident which took place in the afternoon was lodged by the complainant by way of written report at the Police Station, Nagaur on 27.8.2005 at 8.00 p.m. On this, F.I.R. No. 361/2005 was registered and investigation commenced against the accused for the aforementioned offences. The accused persons have approached this Court for quashing of the impugned F.I.R. by way of this misc. petition on the ground that the same is motivated with malafides and also on the ground that the proceedings' were instigated by the police officers themselves.
(3.) PRESSING for quashing of the impugned F.I.R., learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the respondent No.2 Sabir Hussain in the brother of the complainant Mohd. Alsam and is a clerk posted in the office of Superintendent of Police, Nagaur for the last 15 years and the whole action in this case was aided and abetted by the police at Sabir Hussain's instance wherein the police officers of the police station, Nagaur convicted with the complainant party in an attempt to dispossess the petitioners from their lawful owned property. Certain documents have been produced along with this petition to canvass the fact that the police officers of police station, Nagaur accompanied the complainant party in order to dispossess the petitioners from the property and as such, the whole of the F.I.R. registered against the petitioners was nothing but a tool of oppression intended to abuse the powers of police for taking illegal action of dispossession of the petitioners. The petitioners have arrayed the S.P., Dy. S.P., S.H.O., Police Station, Nagaur, by name as respondents No.3 to 5. Reliance in support of the arguments have been placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 and it has been submitted that if the criminal proceedings are actuated with malice and where the allegations made in the F.I.R. are absurd, then the High Court can exercise its powers to quash the investigation as well. When the petition came up for consideration before this Court, this Court by order dated 18.4.2006 ordered as below : "It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that he is in possession of the disputed land under a sale deed in his favour. It is further contended that the complainant party has no title over the said land and the non-petitioner No.2 is a force clerk in the office of Supdt. of Police, Nagaur, therefore at the behest of non-petitioner No.2, the police officials viz. Vishna Ram Bishnoi, Dy. S.P., Nagaur and Veer Singh, SHO, Nagaur came on the spot to dispossess the petitioner. There is no power left with the police to dispossess a person like the petitioner and to give any possession to the complainant without any legal authority. Though, they came on the spot and tried to dispossess the petitioner. It is further submitted that he has also challenged the FIR No.361/2005 P.S. Nagaur and made a prayer for investigation by the C.B.I. Issue notices to the non-petitioners. Notices are made returnable within a period of two weeks. Mr. Ashok Upadhyay, learned Public Prosecutor accepts notice on behalf of the State, therefore notice need not be issued to State. Let a copy of this petition be supplied to learned Public Prosecutor. The non-petitioner Nos. 4 and 5 are directed to explain as to under what authority of law, they went on the spot for dispossessing the petitioner. List after two weeks." ;