Allahabad High Court
Manoj Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P And Another on 11 April, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 91 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3058 of 2022 Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Nath Yadav,Abhishek Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.
Heard Sri Abhishek Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Ms. Sushma Soni, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 20.12.2020 and cognizance order dated 25.6.2021 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No. 303 of 2021 (State Vs. Manoj Yadav) arising out of Case Crime No. 167 of 2020, under Sections 353, 427, 504 IPC and 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Khetasrai, District Jaunpur.
The FIR was lodged on 15.12.2020 by Revenue Inspector Rajneesh Kumar Singh alleging therein that accused Manoj Yadav is taking illegal possession of the Arazi No. 838 which is Naveen Parti. When revenue team visited spot to prevent illegal possession then the accused named in the FIR with some outsiders used criminal force against him, caused hindrance in the official duty, abused them and torn the papers of Lekhpal and damaged the property. After investigation charge-sheet has been submitted.
The contentions of learned counsel for the applicants are that the father of the applicant namely Lal Bahadur has inherited land Arazi Nos. 837 and 839 and between these land Land Arazi No. 838 area 0.040 hectare is situated, which is due to fault of revenue authorities has got recorded as Naveen Parti. The land Arazi No. 838 is in possession of ancestors and during this period two times consolidation proceedings have been initiated and that land remained as such between the Bhumidhari land of the ancestors of the applicant and that land is being used since time of ancestors as ABADI and pumping set has been installed in the same and a gate has also been made to settle the way to the educational institution. It is also contended that father of the applicant filed an injunction suit no. 374 of 2020 on 19.3.2020 in which notice has been issued and Amin Commissioner has also submitted report with field book.
It is also contended that a person who has encroached at the public utility Khalihan land i.e. Land Arazi No. 252 area 0.061 hectare since more than 20 years and the revenue authorities continuously had passed the orders to remove the same but that could not have been removed therefore, on Arvind Kumar Yadav of the village concerned filed writ petition before this Hon'ble Court and in garb of the same a proceeding under section 122B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act was initiated and ultimately an eviction order was passed against the encroacher (Santosh Kumar) on 9.12.2016, against that a revision was preferred before the Collector which was dismissed on 17.1.2018 and thereafter a writ No. 8565 of 2018 was preferred by encroacher (Santosh Kumar) before this Hon'ble Court which was disposed of directing to be measured the land and ultimately it was found that he is in encroachment at the Khalihan land. It is further contended that Sub Divisional Magistrate and Tehsildar being colluded with the encroacher (Santosh Kumar) to provided undue benefit to him, without taking into notice to the provisions of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and Rules, 2016 and without making any list of competent persons as required to allotted the Awasi Lease, absolutely illegally and arbitrary manner on 28.11.2020 settled a Awasi patta in favour of encroacher (Santosh Kumar) to area of 0.012 hectare in the Land Arazi No. 838 in which the applicant's gate of institution is situated.
It is also contended that on the date of incident the applicant has been illegally detained in a proceeding U/s 107, 116 and 151 Cr.P.C. and despite being prepared to file surety bond he was not released for 3 days. It is also contended that after registration of the FIR within five days charge-sheet has been submitted without recording statement of any independent witness in a malicious manner. It is also contended that opposite parties had ill intention against the accused-applicant and this proceeding has been instituted with ulterior motive just to harass the applicant and is an abuse of process of court.
Learned A.G.A. contended that there are clear allegations of criminal act against the applicant. After credible evidence charge-sheet has been submitted and cognizance has been taken. There is no ground to quash the charge-sheet.
The contents of the FIR discloses a cognizable offence and it is distinct from any civil litigation. Further applicant has failed to show any legal right as per revenue records in his favour. He has also failed to show that he has any stay order from any civil court in his favour. He is claiming the title on the disputed land on the basis that it is situated in between plot no. 837 and 839 which belongs to applicant. All other arguments as assailed by the learned counsel for the applicant are matter of trial which can not be adjudicated in a proceeding U/s 482 Cr.P.C. On the basis of credible evidence charge-sheet has been submitted and cognizance has been taken. It is settled principle of law that at this stage only prima facie case is to be seen as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. There is nothing on record to show that charge-sheet, cognizance order or continuation of proceeding is an abuse of process of law or court.
The application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 11.4.2022 Masarrat