Crl. Misc. No.M-34124 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-34124 of 2010 Date of Decision: November 19, 2010 Harjinder Singh and another …..Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioners. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. claiming that petitioner No.1 has purchased 14 kanals 10 marlas of land from Labh Singh in the year 2004 and 2008, husband of respondent No.5-Raj Rani She had made an attempt to seek permanent injunction and initiate proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. but after having failed in her attempt to prejudice the rights of the petitioners she on August 12, 2010 alongwith others abused the petitioners and had Crl. Misc. No.M-34124 of 2010 [2] thrown stones and threatened that in case the petitioners tried to cultivate the land, a false case will be registered against the petitioners. In this context, the petitioners seem to have filed a representation annexure P-3- to S.P. Khanna on August 13, 2010. I have gone through the averments in annexure P-3 but have not been able to make up my mind as to how cognizable offence is made out from the allegations in the said complaint warranting a direction to the S.P., Khanna to take necessary action as per Section 154 (3) Cr.P.C. In case the petitioners feel that they are in actual physical possession of the property purchased by petitioner No.1 and that there is any threat of interference in their possession or title, they have got remedies available to them in civil law. In case any substantive offence is committed by the private respondents, it will always be open to the petitioners to set the machinery of prosecution in motion by adopting the procedure of law. So far as apprehension of petitioners that the rival party being ladies will involve the petitioners in any false criminal case is concerned, I am afraid no relief can be granted in anticipation at this stage. Besides this, there is not even any allegation that there is threat to the life and liberty of the petitioners. This petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to avail any other legal remedy available to them in accordance with law. In case there is any threat to the life and liberty of the petitioners, it will be open to them to approach the concerned police authorities for safeguarding their constitutional rights. Crl. Misc. No.M-34124 of 2010 [3] November 19, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE