Crl. Misc. No. M-34833 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-34833 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 7.12.2010 Smt. Shamsher Kaur & others ...Petitioners Versus Union Territory of Chandigarh & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. S.S. Tiwana, Advocate for the petitioners. Rajan Gupta, J. (oral) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. wherein the petitioners have sought a direction to respondents No.1 & 2 for taking appropriate action against respondents No.3 to 10 for allegedly dismantling the boundary wall constructed by husband of petitioner No.1. Prayer has also been made for quashing of proceedings initiated under Sections 107/151 Cr.P.C. against petitioners No.1 & 2 being abuse of process of law. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are residents of House No.1711, Burail, Sector 45, Chandigarh. According to him, the house is constructed on the land inherited by them. In front of the house, there was a vacant plot and for safety purposes husband of petitioner No.1 raised a boundary wall thereon. Now respondent No.6, who is brother of late husband of petitioner No.1, is threatening to throw them out of the house and was also making Crl. Misc. No. M-34833 of 2010 2 efforts to occupy the vacant plot in front of the house of the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that matter has been reported to the police number of times but they were helping the private respondents. Instead of registering a case against respondents No.4 to 10, they had lodged a false DDR under Sections 107,151 Cr.P.C. against petitioners No.1 & 2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and given careful thought to the facts of the case. It appears that there is some dispute of civil nature between the petitioners and the private respondents regarding a house situated in Burail (Chandigarh), to which the petitioners are trying to give a colour of criminal nature. In any case they have effective remedy by way of Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. and/or complaint before the competent court in case any cognizable offence is made out. The present petition, however, appears to be totally frivolous and does not warrant any interference in inherent jurisdiction of this court. The same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE 7.12.2010 'rajpal'