JUDGMENT Mrs. Sabina, J.: - This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C. for short) for quashing of Calendra dated 12.6.2011 under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short) (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a Non-Resident Indian. Petitioner had been duly provided security on his application that he apprehended danger from his brother Hardeep Singh. None of the complaints submitted by the petitioner were found to be false. Hence, no proceedings could be initiated against the petitioner under Section 182 IPC. 3. Learned State counsel, who is assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, has opposed the petition. 4. In the present case, petitioner as well as complainant Hardeep Singh are real brothers. Both of them are Non Resident Indians. It has transpired, during the course of arguments, that petitioner Pritam Singh and complainant Hardeep Singh are having some civil litigation with regard to their property. Admittedly, petitioner has been provided security as and when he moved an application before the police with regard to threat to his life on his visit to India. 5. During the course of arguments, learned State counsel has failed to show any order passed by the competent authority declaring that the complaint filed by the petitioner was false. Although, police had not taken any action on the complaint filed by the petitioner on the ground that due to civil litigation pending between the parties, no action was required to be taken but the police had not found the complaints to be false at that time. At one stage, proceedings under Section 107/ 151 Cr.P.C. were initiated in the year 2008 at the instance of the petitioner. Later on Hardeep Singh was discharged in the said proceedings. During the course of arguments, it has also transpired that complainant Hardeep Singh has also been moving complaints against the petitioner. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner undertakes that he shall not file any false/ unnecessary complaints against his brother Hardeep Singh in future. In these circumstances, it would be just and expedient to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 182 IPC. 7. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner undertakes that he shall not file any false/ unnecessary complaints against his brother Hardeep Singh in future. In these circumstances, it would be just and expedient to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 182 IPC. 7. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Calendra dated 12.6.2011 under Section 182 IPC (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. ---------0.B.S.0------------