Allowed

Balkar Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2021A482/9698/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 198-A of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act held to be premature, observing that no details of the requisite first eviction proceedings were disclosed and the prosecution lacked essential ingredients.

What did the court decide?

The summoning order dated 03.09.2008, charge sheet dated 08.07.2008, and the entire proceedings of Case No. 4 of 2008 were quashed.

Balkar Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9698 of 2009

¶3

Applicant :- Balkar Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- R.N. Sharma,Atul Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Atul Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 03.09.2008, charge sheet dated 08.07.2008 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 4 of 2008 (State Vs. Balkar Singh & Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 787 of 2008, under Section - 198-A of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, , Police Station- Amariya, District- Pilibhit, pending in the court of Pargana Magistrate, Pilibhit.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants states that applicant no.3 is dead.

¶8

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, the prosecution under Section 198-A(2) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') may arise only in the event a person re-enters unlawful possession over the property of another after being evicted under Section 198-A(1) of the Act. Plainly, there is no remedy of prosecution available with respect to the first eviction proceedings of such an unlawful occupant.

¶9

Tested in that light, the FIR allegations only allege that the land had been thrice measured. Even as to that, no details of proceedings or orders have been asserted either in the FIR or in the statements recorded under

¶10

Section 161 Cr.P.C.

¶11

Unless primary fact of first eviction proceedings instituted and concluded in accordance with the provisions of Section 198-A(1) of the Act are disclosed, the basic ingredients of offence under Section 198-A(2) of the Act may never be established.

¶12

In complete absence of such necessary details, at present, it appears, the prosecution is wholly misconceived and pre-mature. If allowed to stand it may only result in wastage of Court's time and also may result in abuse of the process of Court.

¶13

In this regard, it is also relevant to note, in the FIR itself, the first informant has prayed for restoration of possession which appears to be the main grievance. Leaving all courses open to the parties to contest the matter in civil proceedings, at present, the instant prosecution is found to be lacking in essential ingredient.

¶14

Accordingly, the present application is allowed . The summoning order dated 03.09.2008, charge sheet dated 08.07.2008 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 4 of 2008 (State Vs. Balkar Singh & Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 787 of 2008, under Section - 198-A of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, Police Station- Amariya, DistrictPilibhit, pending in the court of Pargana Magistrate, Pilibhit are quashed.

¶15

Order Date :- 25.11.2021 Abhilash

Balkar Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balkar Singh and Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alok Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ali Akbar @ Babu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chain Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogesh Bharadwaj and Another Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ashish Kumar Modanwal and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another