JUDGMENT 1. - The case was taken up at 2.00 p.m. Appearance was put in on behalf of respondent No. 1 as well as respondent No. 2 Sanwar Mai Saraf, by the learned PP and Shri Z.A. Naqvi respectively. Shri Vijay Singh, I.O. is also present. 2. On query from the learned counsel for the respondents as also from the Investigating Officer, it could not be ascertained as to under what provision of law the Investigating Officer had placed a lock on the office premises of the Federation of Rajasthan Trade and Industries (FORTI), which is a Company registered under the Rajasthan Non Trading Companies Act, 1960. 3. The Investigating Officer of the case submitted that in view of the apprehension of breach of peace, he had placed the lock on the office premises. The Investigating Officer seems to have been acting under misconception of law. Instead of proceeding under the relevant provisions in the Cr.P.C. he opted to proceed to virtually attach the immovable property without having jurisdiction to do so either under section 102 Cr.P.C. or under section 457 Cr.P.C. He should have thought twice whether it was appropriate to proceed against the parties under section 107/116 Cr.P.C. or to proceed against either of them or both of them under section 145 Cr.P.C. Since, prima facie, it appears that the office premises of FORTI have been locked by the Investigating Officer against the provisions of law, it is directed that he shall remove such lock from the said office premises forthwith. In case he apprehends that the dispute concerning immovable property is likely to commit breach of public peace, he may proceed against both of them or any of them in accordance with the appropriate provisions of law. 4. It was brought to my notice that the civil court is already seized of the matter and certain orders in the nature of injunction have already been issued by such court. In case the Investigating Officer wants to seek guidance in the present matter, he may approach such civil court for necessary orders. In so far as the present petition is concerned, there remains nothing to be done since both the parties have been heard and the petition may be and is hereby disposed of, as stated above.The petition stands disposed of. *******