Patna High Court - Orders
Dhano Singh vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 19 August, 2014
Author: Anjana Prakash
Bench: Anjana Prakash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.6107 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -2 Year- 2011 Thana -GAYA HARIZAN District- GAYA
======================================================
1. Dhano Singh S/O Late Balo Singh, Resident Of Village - Manpur, P.S. -
Wazirganj, District - Gaya
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Chhote Lal Rajbanshi S/O Late Fagu Rajbanshi, Resident Of Village -
Manjhagawan, P.S. - Wazirganj, District - Gaya
.... .... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH
ORAL ORDER
3 19-08-2014The Petitioner seeks quashing of the entire proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 2.2.2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Gaya P.S. case No.02 of 2011.
The case of the Informant is that he was a retired driver and had purchased 3 acres 32 decimals of land which was being disputed by accused persons, who were involved with extremist groups. He alleged that Petitioner Dhano Singh and Sakaldeo Singh and his son had insulted/abused him because he was a Harijan. He further stated that the guardian of Dina Nath Singh had purchased certain lands, on the basis of which accused Sakaldeo Singh had taken Kisan Credit Card. A Title Suit No.88 of 2009 was instituted by the Informant's wife for the same plot. A proceeding under Sections 107, 144, 145 Cr.P.C. had been falsely initiated by Petitioner in which accused Sakaldeo Singh was a prime witness. On the date of occurrence, the accused persons Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.6107 of 2014 (3) dt.19-08-2014 2/2 came to him and abused him and on his protest subsequently also assaulted him.
It has been submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that as stated in the First Information Report there is bonafide land dispute between the parties, on account of which a proceeding under Sections 107, 144, 145 Cr.P.C. had been initiated between the parties and in this background the present First Information Report has been instituted only for the reason of putting pressure on them.
On the other hand, the Counsel for the Informant submits that there is definite allegation of falsely foisting a proceeding against the Informant and of abusing him and, therefore, the Petitioner should be prosecuted.
Considering the background of the dispute, I would be inclined to hold that the present Complaint is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court and deserves to be set aside.
Hence, the application is allowed and the entire proceeding including the order of cognizance dated 2.2.2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Gaya P.S. case No.02 of 2011 is hereby set aside.
(Anjana Prakash, J) Narendra/-
U T