Partly allowed

Suresh Chandra and 5 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC13 Dec 2024A482/11363/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this miscellaneous application for quashing criminal proceedings under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, the High Court noted that the controversy had already been settled by a Single Judge. The court issued notice to the private respondent and stayed the impugned proceedings until further orders, listing the case for February 2025.

What did the court decide?

Notice issued to private respondent; impugned proceedings stayed; case listed for hearing in February 2025.

Suresh Chandra and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11363 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Suresh Chandra And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ghulam Mohammad Kamil,Mohammad Affan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

1. Heard.

¶6

The instant application has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Crl. Case No. 8982 of 2024 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Bahraich including impugned order dated 08.05.2024 passed therein, summoning the applicants to face trial for the offense under Section 2/3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and to quash the impugned charge-sheet no. 42 of 2024 dated 02.02.2024 related with Case Crime No. 534 of 2023 under Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station- Visheshwarganj, DistrictBahraich.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the present case, but no offense under Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act is made out. As per the prosecution case, the applicants had encroached public utility land in violation of previsions of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. He further submits that there is a complete mechanism in Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 to deal with such type of situation.

¶8

Relying on the decision of this Court dated 06.08.2020 passed in the case of Munshi Lal and Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr. reported in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 9964 of 2020 , and further relying on the decision dated 06.04.2022 passed by this Court in the case of Ashok Kumar and Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr. reported in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 20181 of 2021 , learned counsel for the applicants requests for indulgence of this Court.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted by the Investigating Officer and all these facts can be raised before learned trial Court.

¶10

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the application, judgement relied by learned counsel for the applicants as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the controversy before this Court has already been settled by Hon'ble Single Judge in the case of Munshi Lal and Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr. (supra). In such circumstances, the matter requires consideration.

¶11

Issue notice to private respondent.

¶12

List this case in the month of February, 2025.

¶13

Until further order, the impugned proceedings shall remain stayed.

¶14

Order Date :- 13.12.2024 Arpan

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suresh Chandra and 5 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Chandra and 5 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Joginder Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mohd. Danish Vs Commissioner Faizabad Division Faizabad and Ors.

Heera Lal Vs Principal Judge Family Court Sultanpur and Others

Sultan Khan Vs State of U.P.and Ors.

Srvesh and Others vs Shri Masoom Ali Sarwar, M.D., U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Lko.

Om Prakash @ Karta Ram Vs Principal Judge Family Court Shravasti and Ors.