Patna High Court - Orders
Matloob Alam @ Matloob Master @ Maktub ... vs The State Of Bihar & Anr on 27 April, 2012
Author: Anjana Prakash
Bench: Anjana Prakash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.18228 of 2009
======================================================
1. Matloob Alam @ Matloob Master @ Maktub Master son of late Abbas,
2. Sanjina Khatoon @ Smt. Maktoob @ Shahina Khatoon wife of Matloob
Alam @ Maktoob,
3. Jabir Alam son of Iltab Ali,
4. Mantao @ Mahtab son of Iltab Ali,
5. Mahboob Alam son of late Abbas,
6. Budhwa son of Mir Sahab,
7. Fajerun Nissaa wife of Mir Sahab,
8. Aamna Khatoon wife of late Jainuddin,
9. Tajeefa wife of Zabir,
10. Mahnaz wife of Shakir Alam,
11. Bijili wife of Mahtba,
12. Samewa daughter of Mahtab &
13. Noor Dana wife of Mahboob Alam, all resident of village-Dakupara,
P.S.-Kochadhaman, District- Kishanganj
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar &
2. Amela Khatoon wife of Gulfoddin, resident of village-Dakupara, P.S.-
Kochadhaman, District- Kishanganj
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH
ORAL ORDER
3/ 27-04-2012Heard the parties.
The Petitioners seek quashing of the entire proceeding including the order dated 07.11.2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Kishanganj, in Complaint Case No.C-231 of 2006 by which he has taken cognizance under sections 147, 323, 379/511, 452, 500 Indian Penal Code.
The case of the Complainant is that she was living in a house situated on ancestral land. The accused persons allegedly threatened her to vacate the said land and on the date of occurrence they came and snatched away her money from the house.
It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that 2 Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18228 of 2009 (3) dt.27-04-2012 2/2 the husband of the Complainant had obtained Basgit Parcha for the said land but after due process of law the said Parcha was cancelled by a competent authority on 18.08.2002. Since the dispute between the parties subsisted a proceeding under section 144 Cr. P. C. was initiated in the year 2007 and it was decided in favour of the Petitioner No.4 on 31.08.2007. Further submission is that it is on account of bonafide land dispute that the present case has been instituted for reasons of malice to coerce them into settling the dispute.
On the other hand counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 submits that in the facts of the case an offence is made out and, therefore, the prosecution should continue.
Having gone though the complaint petition as well as background facts of the case which are not disputed by the Opposite Party No.2, I am inclined to allow this application since the complaint is frivolous and fictitious in nature having been filed only with a view to convert a civil dispute into one of criminal nature.
In view of such, entire proceeding including the order dated 07.11.2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Kishanganj, in Complaint Case No.231 of 2006 by which he has taken cognizance under sections 147, 323, 379,/511, 452, 500 Indian Penal Code is hereby quashed.
Application stands allowed.
JA/- (Anjana Prakash, J)