IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-23897 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 8.8.2011 Gurmeet Singh ....Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present: Mr.Paramjit Batta, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. The facts of the case reveal that the dispute is regarding possession of some property. The allegation is that some of the respondents had gone and demolished the wall. The petitioner has a civil remedy of protecting his possession and even retrieving in the eventuality of it being destroyed. He has also the remedy of filing a complaint against the persons who are alleged to have violated his right to enjoyment of property. The powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be invoked to interfere in the process which has civil ramifications even though they may be suggestive connotations of some violation of a right. The petitioner has efficacious remedy in approaching the Magistrate in such an eventuality. The exceptional power of this court under Section 482 of the Code is meant only to prevent the abuse of the process of law and Crl.Misc.No.M-23897 of 2011 (O&M) -2- to secure the interest of justice, but under no circumstances can it be permitted to degenerate into the remedy for redressal of something for which there are more efficacious remedies available. Frequent exercise of this power to involve the arm of police in disputes which are civil in nature or disputes which are prima facie borne out from the facts leading to civil transactions is likely to embolden the police to transgress into civil domains. Hence, no ground to interfere under Section 482 of the Code is made out. At this stage ,learned counsel for the petitioner prays for permission to withdraw the instant petition. Permitted to do so. Dismissed as withdrawn. 8.8.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss