Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAM MEHAR versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ram Mehar v. State of Haryana & Ors - CRM-1213-m-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 4663 (24 July 2006)

Crl.M.No. 1213 M OF 2006.

******

Ram Mehar vs State of Haryana & others

Present : Mr.J.S.Bedi, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr.Deepak Girotra, AAG, Haryana.

*******

Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, is for the issuance of directions to respondents No.1 to 4 to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and for the registration of an FIR against the accused persons.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner fears for his life and property, as respondent No.5, with the backing of the entire village, has dis-possessed the petitioner from his land. The petitioner is, therefore, unable to enter his village. It is prayed that a case be registered against respondent No.5 and the petitioner's life, liberty and property be protected.

Counsel for the State of Haryana, on the other hand, contends that the matter was thoroughly investigated. It did not reveal the commission of any cognizable offence and, therefore, the present petition be dismissed.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The dispute, in the present case, has its genesis in a dispute with respect to property. The petitioner claims to have been illegally dispossessed by respondent No.5 and expresses his inability to enter his village and house. In my considered opinion, the dispute, as to possession Crl.M.No. 1213 M OF 2006 : 2 :

and ownership of the property, referred to in this petition, is civil in nature and must await adjudication thereof by a Civil Court. As regards the petitioner's plea that his life is in danger, the petitioner would be at liberty to file an appropriate application before respondent No.3. If such an application is filed, respondent No.3 shall pass appropriate orders in respect thereof.

Any opinion, expressed herein, with respect to the nature of dispute, shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion, on the merits of the controversy and parties would be free to avail such other appropriate remedy, as may be available to them, in accordance with law.

The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

( RAJIVE BHALLA )

July 31, 2006. JUDGE

`kk'


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.