IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 35588 of 2010 Date of decision: 07.02.2011 Shanti Saroop ........ Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: None for the petitioner Mr. K S Pannu, DAG, Punjab for respondents No. 1 to 4 Mr. Rajesh Dadwal, Advocate for respondents No. 5o to 8 -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for directing respondent No. 2 for registering an FIR under Section 452 and 506 IPC against respondents No. 5 to 8 for forcibly occupying and constructing a building on the land owned by the petitioner and for threatening the petitioner and further for directing respondent No. 2 to take action against respondent No. 3 under Section 182 IPC for supplying a false report against the petitioner. Separate replies on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2, 3 and 4 has been filed in Court today. The same are taken on record. The reply of DSP on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 reads as under: “It was found in the inquiry that respondent No. 5 did not encroach the property of the petitioner and respondent No. 5 produced photograph of his old katcha house to the inquiry officer HC Harbhajan Singh. It was found in the inquiry that Sarpanch Meera Devi was noto present when the respondent No. 5 raised new construction of his house in the property in questin. It was found in the inquiry that respondent No. 5 has raised new construction of his house in the property in question before the petitioner got status quo order from the Hon'ble Civil Court. It was also found in the inquiry that when the petitioner submitted an application to the police of PS Hajipur, for stopping respondent No. 2 from raising construction in the property in question, then he did not produce any proof regarding his ownership of the property in question. Civil suit regarding the property in dispute is pending in the Hon'ble Civil Court. Therefore, no interference of the police of PS Hajipur is made out. Thereafter, SHO, P S Hajipur sent the inquiry report to SSP, Hoshiarpur and the applications of the petitioner were filed. Thereafter, the petitioner also submitted application bearing No. 2466 PD dated 13.07.2010 and 2513 SSP dated 31.07.2010 to SSP Hoshiarpur. The said applications were marked to SHO, PS Hajipur and it was found in the inquiry by SHO that respondent No. 5 was having old katcha house in the property in question and he was living in the said house in property in question. The respondent No. 5 raised construction of a new house in the property in question where he was having old katcha house after getting grant of Rs.38,500/- under Indra Vikas Yozna from the Government and Civil suit regarding the property in question is pending before the civil court. Therefore, no action is required on these applications of the petitioner. After conducting inquiry the SHO, PS Hajipur sent the inquiry report to the SSP, Hoshiarpur and the applications were filed.” In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to avail of any other alternative remedy which may be available to him in accordance with law. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 07.02.2011 mohan