vehemently opposed this application. Learned A.G.A. submits that subsequent to the aforementioned Five Judges Bench judgment of the Supreme Court, a Two Judges Bench judgment of Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava Vs. State of U.P., (2015) 6 SCC 287, has observed that jurisdiction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. should not be exercised in a routine manner. Courts should exercise more care, caution and circumspection while dealing with an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. It is in the light of above that Court below called for a police report qua the allegations made in the application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant. As per the material which emerged on record of aforementioned criminal miscellaneous application, it is evident that the parties had entered into an agreement to sell. Pursuant to the same certain amount of money was given by the applicant to the prospective accused as earnest money. The grievance of the applicant is that accused opposite party no. 2 has failed to discharge his obligation by executing a sale deed in respect of the land in dispute. On the above conspectus, the concerned Magistrate thus concluded that dispute between the parties is prima facie a civil dispute and criminal prosecution cannot be resorted to settle the civil dispute. On the above conspectus, the learned A.G.A. therefore, contends that the jurisdictional Magistrate has not committed any illegality in passing the order impugned. As such, no interference is warranted by this Court in present application.
