Dharam Vir Khosla vs Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur

Harmohinder Kaur Sandhu, J.

Dharamvir Khosla has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for advising Station House officer, Hariana, to register a case under Sections 403, 404, 406, 419 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code against Shri Prem Piara Khosla and three others mentioned in the heading of the petition. As per averments made in the petition he had some dispute regarding property with Shri Prem Piara Khosla and others. He had filed a suit for rendition of accounts which was decided by SubJudge Ist Class, Hoshiarpur on 24.12.1981. The property in question was joint Hindu Family property of the petitioner and Shri Krishan Gopal Khosla father of Shri Prem Piara Khosla who died on 2271974. Shri Krishan Gopal Khosla committed fraud and misappropriated Joint Hindu Family funds. Joint Hindu Family estate devolved upon Shri Prem Piara Khosla after the death of his father and he was liable for offences under Sections 419, 403, 404 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Navin Kumar and Ashwani Kumar were the sons of Shri Prem Piara Khosla and Krishan Kant Sharma was their permanent counsel and as such they too were liable for the various offences. A complaint dated 25.3.1992 was addressed to Senior Superintendent of Police, Hoshiarpur which was endorsed by him to Station House Officer, Police Station Hariana vide his office Diary No. 281 of the even date for necessary action but no case had been registered against Shri Prem Piara Khosla, his sons and their counsel.

In the return filed by the respondents this fact was admitted that complaint dated 2531992 was received from the petitioner and the same was sent to Station House Officer, Police Station Hariana for necessary action. On enquiry the complaint was found to be false.

The contention of the petitioner is that there was a dispute regarding the Joint Hindu Family property between him and Prem Piara Khosla. The property devolved from common ancestor Thakur Dass Khosla and father of Prem Piara Khosla acted as manager after the death of the common ancestor. The manager and thereafter his son Prem Piara Khosla misappropriated and embezzled the joint Hindu Family funds. They were criminally liable for misappropriation and embezzlement of certain amount and a complaint was sent to the Senior Superintendent of Police. Hoshiarpur but no case was registered by Station House Officer, Hariana to whom it was endorsed for necessary action.

It was urged on behalf of the State that this petition was not maintainable. In fact the dispute between the petitioner and other members of Joint Hindu Family was of civil nature and earlier, as is made out from Paras No. 1 to 15 of the petition, the petitioner had filed a civil suit for rendition of accounts which was decided on 24121981. If the petitioner was not satisfied with the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court he could prefer an appeal against that judgment and decree but no appeal was filed and the decree of the civil court had become final.

A perusal of para 20 of the reply filed by the respondent shows that in fact the complaint was received in the office of the respondent which was forwarded to the concerned Police Station As there was no substance in the complaint and the allegations were prima facie found to be false no case was registered. The petitioner has not placed a copy of the complaint on record. Resort to Article 226 is not intended as an alternative remedy for relief which may be obtained in any other manner. When the police officer had not taken any action on the complaint presented by the petitioner, he could very well present the complaint in the court of Illaqa Magistrate but no such complaint was filed and instead of approaching the Illaqa Magistrate the petitioner first moved one petition in the Supreme Court but later on withdrew the same and filed the present petition. Annexure B is the copy of the order of the Apex Court. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy of approaching the Illaqa Magistrate and filing a complaint, therefore, this petition cannot be entertained and as such is dismissed. The petitioner, if so advised may file a complaint in the court of Illaqa Magistrate.