Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Santosh Devi And Another vs Baba Sham Sunder Dass on 21 December, 2021
Author: Puneet Gupta
Bench: Puneet Gupta
Sr. No. 218
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Pronounced on : 21.12.2021
CM (M) No. 59/2021
CM No. 9182/2021
Santosh Devi and another ....Petitioner(s)
Through: Ms. Monika Kohli, Advocate.
Vs
Baba Sham Sunder Dass .....Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PUNEET GUPTA, JUDGE
ORDER
1. The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashment of Civil Suit, filed by the respondent herein against the petitioners claiming damages for malicious prosecution as the respondent was acquitted in the case filed against him under Sections 354/323 RPC, on the ground that the suit is not maintainable as it does not disclose any cause of action, the basic averments for instituting the suit are lacking, no where it is alleged in the suit that the prosecution was instituted without any just or reasonable cause, no ill-will is attributed anywhere in the complaint against the petitioners and that actual damage is suffered by the respondents is not made out from the plaint.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners has reiterated the submissions as mentioned in the petition during the course of arguments.
2 CM (M) No. 59/2021
3. It appears from the record placed on the file that the respondent herein has been acquitted by the court of learned Judicial Magistrate (Sub-Judge), Katra in a challan filed against him under Section 354 RPC vide judgment dated 30.07.2020. The prosecution was set in motion on a complaint filed by Santosh Devi against the respondent herein as she filed application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C in a court of law.
4. The petitioners have approached this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and the court has been called upon to quash the suit instituted by the respondent herein against the petitioners and also the proceedings arising thereof.
5. The court under Article 227 will not exercise its jurisdiction where the petitioner has ample remedy to agitate his/her cause before an alternative forum. The petitioners without approaching the trial court with their grievance have rushed to this court for quashment of the suit proceedings. The petitioners have ample remedy under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure to contest the maintainability of the suit. The petitioners cannot jump the que and seek remedy as per convenience.
6. In 2015 Legal Eagle 135 titled Radhey Shyam & ors. v. Chhabi Nath & ors., the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that in view of the law referred to above in cases of property rights and in disputes between private individuals writ court should not interfere unless there is any infraction of statute or it can be shown 3 CM (M) No. 59/2021 that a private individual is acting in collusion with a statutory authority.
7. In light of the above, the petition is held to be not maintainable at this stage and is, accordingly, dismissed. The petitioners are at liberty to raise the objections regarding maintainability of the suit before the trial court.
8. Disposed of accordingly.
(Puneet Gupta) Judge Jammu 21.12.2021 Pawan Chopra Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether the order is reportable? Yes/No PAWAN CHOPRA 2021.12.21 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document