Allahabad High Court
Sri Krishna And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 May, 2025
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73362 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40168 of 2024 Applicant :- Sri Krishna And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aniket Yadav,Ramesh Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred to quash the chargesheet dated 18.11.2023 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 12.09.2024 including the entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1175 of 2023 (State vs. Shekhar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 68 of 2023, under sections 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 448 of IPC, P.S. Sakrauli, District Etah, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalesar, Etah as well as to stay the further proceedings of abovementioned case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that alternative remedy available with the authorities to proceed under Section 26 of the U.P. Revenue Code but preference for institution of FIR is not at all maintainable in the light of the dictum pronounced by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order 6.8.2020 passed in Application u/s 482 no. 9964 of 2020 (Munshi Lal and Another vs. State of U.P. and another).
4. Learned counsel for the applicants also submits that although nature of the land which has been alleged to be encroached by the applicants is not covered under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code but the proceeding under Section 26 of the U.P. Revenue Code may be initiated so that bonafide may be proved in pursuance to the application has already been preferred by the applicants under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code for demarcating the plot/land in question against which name of the applicants have been duly recorded in the revenue records i.e. plot no. 1405 and the alleged encroachment has been mentioned in the narration of the FIR is with regard to plot no. 1401 which is having the adjacent boundary with plot no. 1405 in which applicants are co-sharer along with other recorded holder which is apparent from the record of rights appended along with affidavit in support of the instant application available at page no. 59.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for the applicants by way of supporting the action of the opposite party no. 2 but at the same time did not disputed the ratio of the judgment rendered by coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Munshi Lal and Another (supra).
6. In the light of the judgments rendered by coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Munshi Lal and Another (supra) and the observation made above, proceedings initiated at the behest of opposite party no. 2 against the applicants is not sustainable in the eye of law and the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1175 of 2023 (State vs. Shekhar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 68 of 2023, under sections 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 448 of IPC, P.S. Sakrauli, District Etah, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalesar, Etah are hereby set-aside.
7. The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. stands allowed.
8. However, it is made clear that this order will not preclude the authorities concerned to proceed a fresh in pursuance to Section 67/26 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
Order Date :- 6.5.2025 #Vik/-