AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1.The petitioners by this petition seek a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigations or any other quasi judicial body other than Delhi Police to
conduct investigations. They further seek directions to any security agency other than Delhi Police to protect the lives, property and liberties of the
petitioners. Petitioner further seeks orders for the arrest and judicial custody of the senior police officials for allegedly not conducting fair, proper, just
and impartial investigations. 2. The allegations of the petitioners are that the petitioners are the owners of property worth over Rs.500 crores and
have a dispute with his foster brother over said properties.Â
The allegation is that he has trespassed into the house of the petitioners and snatched away all the title documents worth over Rs.500 cores. It is
contended by the petitioners that a complaint was lodged with the police officials, no cognizance was taken and even petitioner no.1 was assaulted.Â
There are further allegations that the foster brother has committed numerous crimes and when complaints are made to police officers, they fail to take
action.Â
Petitioner no.1 appears in person and has not been able to point out or produce any medical report to substantiate his allegation that he was ever
assaulted. He submits that he has got the medical treatment done privately. No documents qua the same have been produced. Â
Apart from filing copies of complaints no material has been placed on record to substantiate the allegations made.Â
Further, from the reading of the petition and the complaints made and the grievance raised by the petitioner do not justify reference of the case for
investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation. The dispute primarily pertains to be a property dispute between petitioners and his foster
brother.Â
Further, it may be noted that there are allegations made against senior police officers and government officials. However, there is no material
produced to substantiate the allegations.Â
Further petitioners contend that they have already filed a complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C. with the Magistrate and filing another complaint
under section 200 Cr.P.C. is going to further delay his case. The contention that filing of a complaint under section 200 Cr PC is going to delay his
case, is no ground for the petitioner not to follow the procedure laid down by law.Â
In my view, the petitioner has neither produced any material nor made out a case for grant of the reliefs sought. In the facts of the present case, the
prayer sought for by the petitioners cannot be granted.
The petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to take appropriate remedies as may be available in law.
Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master. Â