Mr Mohit K Jakhar & ORS. v. Commissioner Of Police & ORS.

$~13 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1305/2024 MR MOHIT K JAKHAR & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Vikram Singh Panwar & Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advs.

versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC for the State SI Sandeep Rawal, HC Vikas Nagar, PS- Lajpat Nagar

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 31.07.2024 CRL.M.A.

17568/2024 (for directions) in W.P.(CRL) 1305/2024 1.

The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 29.04.2024, noting the submissions made by the learned Additional Standing Counsel ('ASC') for the State that the concerned 'beat constable' will be sent to take note of the situation.

2.

The learned ASC for the State submits that the 'beat constable' was sent on the next date and the dispute appears to be over a parking space. He submits that the Police, in such circumstances, cannot proceed further, however, as and when any allegation in regard to the commission of an offence or in The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/08/2024 at 12:26:59

regard to breach of peace is made by any of the parties, appropriate action will be taken.

3.

The present application is filed seeking directions to remove the blockage done by respondent's car in front of the petitioner's office gate.

4.

The petitioner claims that the neighbour has been illegally parking his car in front of the petitioner's office and, thus, blocking the ingress and outgress. It is contended that only the petitioner has right to park a car in front of his office. Concededly, passing any order on such prayers and contention, would require adjudication of facts. Moreover, any order as prayed by the petitioner, would also involve continuous monitoring and supervision on daily basis. Such orders, in the opinion of this Court, cannot be passed while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5.

I, therefore, find no reason to entertain the present application.

6.

The petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate action in accordance of law.

7.

The application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. AMIT MAHAJAN, J JULY 31, 2024 "SS"

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/08/2024 at 12:26:59