Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pramod Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 September, 2012
M.Cr.C. No. 9871/2010
11.09.2012
Shri Manish Datt, Senior counsel with Shri Nishant Datt,
Advocate, counsel for the applicant/petitioner.
Shri B.P. Pandey, GA for the State.
Shri Kuldeep Singh, counsel for the respondent No.2.
With the consent of the parties, the matter is finally
heard.
The petitioner has filed this petition, invoking extra
ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, being aggrieved by the order
dated 15.7.2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Budhar, Shahdol in Criminal Case No. 1108/2010 whereby
cognizance under Section 447, 427 and 506II of the IPC has
been taken against the petitioner and bailable warrant of Rs.
2,000/ has been issued against him for his appearance before
the Court.
Facts, in short, giving rise to this petition are that
respondent No.2 Iliyas Ahmad filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate First Class with allegation that a Project of Coal Bed Methane (CBM) has been established in Gram Sonversha, Police Station Budhar, Shahdol. The said project is being running at the instance of the petitioner. During implementation very big and deep Wells have been digged from which poisonous and dangerous Methane Gas are oozing out. It is further pleaded that complainant/respondent No.2 having a land bearing Khasra No. 259/1 Rakba 4.75 hacters situated in Gram Semra, Janpad Panchayat No. 104, Patwari Halka No. 102 in Tehsil Sohagpur, Shahdol. It is further pleaded that due to the establishment of Reliance Industries nearby the said land, a pipe line has been laid down from his field which was objected by him. The crop of complainant has been damaged and he has suffered a loss of Rs. 5,000/. The petitioner and other members of the project had threatened the complainant, therefore, he made a complaint to police on 25.12.2008. Thereafter, he filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Budhar. Learned Judicial Magistrate took the cognizance against the present applicant under Section 447, 427 and 506 Part II/34 of IPC. Hence this petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Budhar is bad and illegal. He further submits that Khasra No. 259/1 is owned by Lalbahadur, who executed the no objection certificate on a stamp paper vide Annexure3. Since the complainant is not the owner of Khasra No. 259/1, offence under Sections 427, 447 and 506II of IPC are not made out against the applicant. He further submits that allegation in regard to threat is false and fabricated and has been alleged with malicious intention to harass the applicant. He further submits that if the criminal proceeding under Section 447, 427 and 506II of IPC shall remain continued will amount to harassment as well as amount to abuse of process of law., therefore he prays for quashment of criminal Case No. 1108/2010.
Learned counsel for the State and respondent No.2 submit that there is a prima facie evidence on record that petitioner has caused the damage by digging pipe line in the field of complainant Iliyas. They further submit that petitioner has threatened the complainant therefore, there is a prima facie case against the petitioner and trial Magistrate had not committed any illegality or irregularity in passing the impugned order.
I have perused the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate First Class along with the Annexures filed before this Court.
Annexure3 shows that Khasra No. 259/1 is recorded in the name of Naresh Bahadur and Lalbahadur and Lalbahadur had signed the no objection certificate on a stamp in favour of the petitioner. However, Kistbandi Khatouni is filed by the respondent No.2 wherein area 1.921 has been shown in the name of respondent No.2 Iliyas. In these circumstances, it is not specifically establish on record that pipe of Gas Plant was planted in the field of this complainant/respondent No.2. The complainant has not produced documentary evidence before the learned Magistrate. In these circumstances, prima facie case under Section 447, 427 of IPC cannot be said to be made out. In regard to threat complainant has stated that petitioner had threatened him but same was not corroborated by witness Harprasad. Witness Harprasad stated in his statement that the persons who were digging the pipe line had abused the complainant and others and there are general allegations which appear that it is only empty threat to them. Thus, learned Magistrate committed illegality in taking the cognizance. However, if any damage has been caused during process of establishment of the plant, it may be a cause of action for filing a suit for claiming the damage and same will be a matter of civil nature but learned Magistrate has not considered the aforesaid aspect of the case.
In these circumstances, the order passed by the learned Magistrate if remained continue then it will amount to harassment to the applicant, as well as amount to abuse of process of law. Thus, the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate on 15.7.2010 is liable to be quashed.
The petition is accordingly allowed and he criminal proceeding pending against the petitioner in the Court of JMFC as Criminal Case No. 1108/2010, is hereby quashed.
(G.S. Solanki) JUDGE ravi