IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc. No.M-19852 of 2010 Date of decision: 14.7.2010 Sukhwinder Singh ......Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY. PRESENT: Mr.Baljinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** ORDER The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for issuance of directions to the respondents to register FIR against accused persons for fabrication of false record just to grab agricultural land under possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is owner in possession of the land in dispute since 1960 as the same was given on lease to his father and the lease was extended from time to time. Subsequently, a resolution was passed by Gram Pacnhayat vide which the lease was extended. The father of the petitioner has also filed a civil suit against Gram Panchayat which was decreed by the Civil Court in the year 1988. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show any document either with regard to lease given to his father or some extension given from time to time. Learned counsel has also not able to pin point any reason for his apprehension to dispossess him from the land in dispute. Crl.Misc. No.M-19852 of 2010 [2] Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is being pressurized by Shri Sushil Kumar, SDM, other officials, Sarpanch and Members of the Gram Panchayat to hand over possession to one Saroj Bala who has no connection with the land in dispute. The petitioner has also submitted an application dated 25.2.2010 which is pending with the police authorities and no action has been taken so far. It appears from the petition that some civil litigation is pending between petitioner and Gram Panchayat. The petitioner has not been able to produce any document to show his tenancy over the land in dispute or some reasonable apprehension by officials and other persons, including the Gram Panchayat. It has also been mentioned in the petition that application filed by the petitioner is pending before the police athorities and no action has been taken. Without having sufficient documents on record to show his claim over the land in dispute, no direction can be issued in favour of the petitioner to take action against accused persons and the application filed by the petitioner is pending before the police authorities and no action has been taken so far. It is for the petitioner to pursue his application pending before the police authorities. Accordingly, no interference is called for at this stage. The petition is dismissed. (DAYA CHAUDHARY) JUDGE July 14, 2010. raghav