Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mukesh Sharma Son Of Sh Gauri Shankar R/O ... vs U.T. Administration on 2 September, 2009
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-13425 of 2008 (O/M)
Date of Decision : September 02, 2009.
Mukesh Sharma son of Sh Gauri Shankar r/o H. No. 3581, Sector-23-D,
Chandigarh.
...... Petitioner .
Versus.
U.T. Administration, Chandigarh, and others.
..... Respondents .
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH.
Present:- Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate,
for the petitioner .
Mr. Hemant Bassi, Advocate,
for U.T. Administration.
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.
The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner, praying for quashing of F.I.R. No. 79, dated 11.05.2008 under Section 188 I.P.C., Police Station Sector-19, Chandigarh, being false, frivolous and misuse of process of law.
It has been stated in the petition that the petitioner is owner of barsati portion of H. No. 19, Sector-18-A, Chandigarh, which is a 10 marla house and the first floor and the ground floor are owned by other persons. The barsati portion contains three rooms and had been rented out by the petitioner to five students with effect from 01.03.2008, details of those students is mentioned in para-3 of the petition. Immediately on letting out of the portion to the tenants, the petitioner as per requirement of law, intimated the Chandigarh Administration at e-Sampark Centre, Sector-18, Chandigarh, vide receipts No. 20813686 and 20813687, dated 12.03.2008. He stated that Crl. Misc. No. M-13425 of 2008. -2- the e-Sampark Centres have been established by the Chandigarh Administration, which provides services to the general public and citizen. The services offered at the e-Sampark Centre had been mentioned on the back side of the receipts itself. At Serial No. 7 of the abovementioned receipts under the heading, the name of the Department "Chandigarh Police"
and under the heading the citizen friendly services provided, it has been mentioned as Tenant Registration, Domestic Servants Registration, Payment of General, Sticker and Postal Challan. On the basis of these receipts, it has been stated that the petitioner had complied with the requirement of law as these five students were residing as tenants in the three rooms of barsati portion of House No. 19, Sector-18, Chandigarh. Some outsiders and tenants had a fight in the premises, resulting in registration of F.I.R. No. 78 under Sections 307, 34 I.P.C. dated 11.05.2008 as one of them suffered serious injury. A separate F.I.R. being F.I.R. No. 79 dated 11.05.2008 was registered against the petitioner on the ground that the records of the boys living at the top floor of House no. 19, Sector-18, Chandigarh, checked in the beat box register, but no information was found recorded therein. 4-4 boys and 6-7 boys were living in each rooms, therefore, the petitioner, who is the owner of the barsati portion in question, has violated the order of District Magistrate issued under Section 144 Cr.P.C., vide order No. DM/MA/08/3452 , dated 14.03.2008 and, therefore, an offence under Section 188 I.P.C. is found to have been committed by the petitioner. Copy of the F.I.R. is appended as Annexure-P-3.
The petitioner, thereafter, on coming to know about registration of the F.I.R., approached the Court for grant of anticipatory bail, which was granted by the Lower Court, Chandigarh. He, thereafter, preferred a written Crl. Misc. No. M-13425 of 2008. -3- representation and also met Inspector General of Police, Union Territory, Chandigarh, on 15.05.2008, stating therein the details as has been mentioned above with regard to information, which he had supplied to e-Sampark Centre, Sector-18, Chandigarh, and an enquiry was marked to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh, who further marked it to the D.S.P. (E), Chandigarh, and it was found, as per the inquiry, that the petitioner had submitted information about two persons as tenant on 12.03.2008 and the information was not complete. It was also concluded that information regarding nine persons was not furnished by the petitioner and, therefore, complaint dated 21.11.2008 under Section 195 Cr.P.C. was filed in the Court of District Magistrate, Chandigarh.
Counsel for the petitioner contends that the assertion of Chandigarh Administration that there were 11 persons residing in the premises in question and that too as paying guest is incorrect. For terming a kothi/house as paying guest, the requirement is that food should also be supplied to the person residing in the premises. It is nowhere the contention of the Chandigarh Administration that the food was being supplied by the petitioner or a separate kitchen was being run for the said purpose in the premises. He on this basis contends the first and foremost requirement, which would bring the persons residing in the accommodation in question as paying guest having not been fulfilled, the F.I.R. is based on totally erroneous basis and is totally false. The requirement for an accommodation to be termed as paying guest accommodation has been clearly spelt out by the information, which has been supplied by Chandigarh Administration to one Shri Amit Roy, a friend of the petitioner, vide information dated 06.12.2006 (Annexure-P-5), wherein it has been clearly mentioned that the Crl. Misc. No. M-13425 of 2008. -4- the price of food is also charged for and the persons residing in the accommodation cannot run a separate kitchen in the premises. This apart, he relies upon notification dated 14.03.2008 (Annexure-R-1) issued by the District Magistrate under Section 144 Cr.P.C., to contend that the notification itself specifies that the paying guest accommodation involves charging for food and accommodation both and since there is nothing on record to even suggest that such an activity was being carried on by the petitioner nor any money was charged for the food, therefore, the basis for registration of the F.I.R. does not exist and, thus, cannot be sustained. That apart, the petitioner had supplied the required information through e- Sampark Centre, Sector-18, Chandigarh, which has been provided by the Chandigarh Administration for the convenience of citizens and various services are being offered at e-Sampark Centres, for which charges are imposed. He on this basis submits that the F.I.R. registered against the petitioner, is not sustainable and deserves to be quashed as the same is contrary to the notification and the requirement having fulfilled by the petitioner, as per law. He further contends that five students, who were tenants, their information was duly supplied through e-Sampark Centre, Sector-18, Chandigarh, on 12.03.2008 to the Department of Police.
On the other hand, counsel for the respondent-Union Territory, Chandigarh, vehemently argued that the information, which had been given by the petitioner, was with regard to only two persons, whereas as per admitted position, five students were residing there. He further contends that the F.I.R. was registered as the boys living at top floor of the premises owned by the petitioner and on checking in the beat box register, no information was found recorded there. He on this basis submits that the Crl. Misc. No. M-13425 of 2008. -5- F.I.R. had rightly been recorded against the petitioner as he had violated the terms of notification issued by the District Magistrate, Chandigarh, under Section 144 Cr.P.C.
I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case.
The facts are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the information was supplied by the petitioner through e-Sampark with regard to top floor of House No. 19, Sector-18-A, Chandigarh, having been given on rent. The questions, therefore, for determination are whether the petitioner had given accommodation as paying guest accommodation or rented accommodation. And secondly, whether the information, which had been supplied by the petitioner, was qua five students, as he has mentioned in this petition or qua two persons only as has been asserted by the respondents.
To deal with the first question, the F.I.R. No. 79 was registered by the Police on the ground that the record of the boys, who were involved in F.I.R. No. 78, under Section 307, 34 I.P.C. dated 11.05.2008, no record, that they were living on the top floor of House No. 19, Sector-18-A, Chandigarh, on checking was found entered in the beat box register and the said information as required under notification dated 14.03.2008, under Section 144 Cr.P.C., was not provided to Police Station, Sector-19, Chandigarh, leading to the commission of offence under Section 188 I.P.C. by the petitioner. With this position having been clarified with reference to the receipts No. 20813686 and 20813687, dated 12.03.2008, issued by e- Sampark Centre, Sector-18, Chandigarh, wherein an amount of Rs. 208/- for each information is deposited, clearly establishes that the information qua five tenants was supplied by the petitioner. As it is an assertion that Crl. Misc. No. M-13425 of 2008. -6- information qua four tenants could be given through one information and if the tenants were more than four, separate information was to be provided. This fact is not disputed by counsel for the U.T. Chandigarh. It is also not in dispute that the information indeed was supplied by the petitioner, vide abovementioned receipts, but the assertion is that this information was with regard to only five persons, whereas 11 persons were staying as paying guest on the top floor of House No. 19, Sector-18-A, Chandigarh. On a specific assertion having been made by the petitioner in his petition with regard to non providing of kitchen facility, there is no denial on the part of respondents. The notification dated 14.03.2008, which is alleged to have been violated, is only with regard to information to be supplied for providing paying guest accommodation. This notification itself clearly states that the paying guest arrangement involves charging for food and accommodation both. The fact with regard to non supply of food by the petitioner, as has been asserted by him in his petition, the same having not been denied by the respondents, the violation as alleged by petitioner of the notification dated 14.03.2008, cannot be accepted.
A perusal of complaint dated 21.11.2008, which was filed during the pendency of the present petition in this Court, also shows that what is urged in the said complaint under Section 195 Cr.P.C. for prosecution of the petitioner for committing an offence punishable under Section 185 I.P.C. is the violation of order No. DC/MA/08/3452, dated 14.03.2008 (Annexure-R-1). The basic ingredients for the said notification to be applicable is that paying guest accommodation is being provided, which involves charging for food and accommodation both, having not been Crl. Misc. No. M-13425 of 2008. -7- fulfilled, the F.I.R. cannot be sustained as the offence alleged to have been committed is not made out.
It would not be out of way to mention here that the purpose and intent of order dated 14.03.2008 (Annexure-R-1), issued by the District Magistrate under Section 144 Cr.P.C. is neither with an intention to harass the citizens nor is it with an intention to put the owners of the houses, who rent their accommodations to tenants to un-necessary troubles. But, it is only with the purpose of regulating that this arrangement of paying guest facility is not abused by anti social element, who can manage to hide themselves in the city and cause breach of peace and disturbance of public tranquility. It is also intended to curb and control immoral activities, which are carried on or may be indulged into by some of the paying guests, which causes nuisance to the neighbours and other concerned. This is clearly spelt out from the order dated 14.03.2008 (Annexure-R-1), issued by the District Magistrate, Chandigarh, under Section 144 Cr.P.C.
Present is a case, where a citizen has availed of the facilities, which have been provided by the Chandigarh Administration, for providing information through e-Sampark Centres , where the citizens are charged for the services provided to them. It is not in dispute that the services which the petitioner had availed through e-Sampark Centre, Sector-18, Chandigarh, with regard to the information about tenant registration to the Chandigarh Police falls within the services offered at e-Sampark Centres to the citizens. He having availed the said service and the Department of Police without verification of the same, proceeded further to register F.I.R. against him, merely on the checking of record of beat box, is totally unjustified when the notification, violation whereof has been alleged to have been committed by Crl. Misc. No. M-13425 of 2008. -8- the petitioner, does not require that information to be furnished at the beat box as well. It has neither been pleaded nor asserted during arguments that there was any notification or circular, requiring the citizens to give that information at the beat box as well. Before proceeding to register F.I.R. against the citizens without verification of the facts, the Department of Police, Chandigarh, is well advised to be careful in future, so that innocent citizens are not put to harassment and un-necessarily forced to approach this Court.
In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and F.I.R. No. 79 dated 11.05.2008 registered under Section 188 I.P.C., Police Station Sector-19, Chandigarh, (Annexure-P-3), is hereby quashed.
It is clarified herein that any observations made hereinabove, shall have no bearing or effect on F.I.R. No. 78 dated 11.05.2008, registered under Section 307, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Sector-19, Chandigarh.
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE September 02, 2009.
sjks.
Whether referred to the Reporter : ____________________.