B.B.MANGALMURTI,J. - (1.) Instant application has been filed challenging the order dated 18.07.2007 passed by the Court of Shri Piyush Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad in C.P. Case No. 1578 of 2003 whereby and whereunder the Court below took cognizance of the offence under Sections 323, 341, 380, 147 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused persons.
(2.) One of the accused Naresh Kumar Chawda preferred Cr.M.P. No. 1495 of 2007 whereas accused Suresh Kumar Chawda @ Suresh Kr. Chawra preferred Cr.M.P. No. 02 of 2010 before this Court.
(3.) The short fact relevant to this case are that initially a Miscellaneous case No. 333 of 2003 was filed on 13.03.2003 before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad by Md. Ehsanual Haque under section 39 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in the form of Information that he is tenant of the opposite party and running a business of Vulcanizing in the tenanted premise and paying monthly rent of Rs. 300/. He was being threatened by the opposite party for the last two months to vacate the premise as because opposite party intent to let out to some other persons. He has every apprehension of dispossession wrongfully and forcefully. Thereafter, the complainant Ehsanual Haque preferred a Title Suit No. 140 of 2003 before the Court of Munsiff, Dhanbad for declaration and injunction with prayer to declare that the defendants had no right to take possession of the tenanted premises by eviction as described in the schedule below. Further prayer was for a decree of injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents, servants, employees etc. to interfere and obstruct the peaceful enjoyment of the tenanted premise as well as the cost of suit and any other reliefs. Thereafter, he also preferred C.P. Case No. 1578 of 2003 before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad stating therein that he is in occupation of the tenanted premise since 1968 on payment of rent. He is carrying his business of Vulcanizing Works. The opposite parties are pressurizing to vacate the premise and for which threatening was given upon his life also. Then he filed an Information application in the form of Miscellaneous Petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate. He also approached the Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad as well as Sub Divisional Officer but the authorities did not take any steps against the accused persons. The complainant filed a Title Suit No. 140 of 2003 against the accused persons wherein it was averred that the accused persons loaded his articles from his business premise on a truck and also assault inflicted upon them. The accused persons looted his articles and ordered for demolition of the shop premise. It prompted him to file this Complaint petition. In the last Paragraph he has mentioned that the Bodyguard of the S.D.O., Dhanbad asked him to appear before the S.D.O. office where he was threatened and was pressurized to give in writing that he is vacating the premise on his own accord and thereafter he was allowed to go from the office.;