Amrit Lal Patel and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119955

Court No. - 77

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39468 of 2024

Applicant :- Amrit Lal Patel And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Shukla,Ramesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The instant application has been preferred to quash the chargesheet no. 147 of 2021 dated 11.07.2021, cognizance/summoning order dated 06.10.2021, bailable warrant dated 24.11.2022 and the entire proceeding of Case No.793 of 2021 (State vs. Ashok Kumar and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.148 of 2021, under sections 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Bahariya, District- Prayagraj, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 15, Allahabad.

¶8

Brief facts of the present case are that a first information report dated 17.06.2021 bearing Case Crime No.148 of 2021 was lodged by opposite party no.2 in pursuance to sections 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against applicants along with two other named accused with an allegation that they are illegally encroaching a banjar land of Gram Sabha by way of filling soil in it and putting tin shed. The applicants had, thus, caused damage and loss to the public property which is the land vested in Gram Sabha. After lodging of the FIR, the concerned Investigating Officer started inquiry and after conclusion of the same, preferred charge-sheet on dated 11.07.2021 against applicants along with other accused, whereupon learned court concerned has taken cognizance of offence vide order dated 06.10.2021, which impugned the present application.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicants has challenged the charge-sheet as well as cognizance/summoning order on several other grounds inter-alia precisely on the ground that lodging of the first information report taking aid of provisions of the P.D.P.P. Act, 1984 is nothing but an abuse of process of the law, inasmuch as,

¶10

the said provisions cannot be invoked to lodge a criminal case on the allegations of damage or loss caused to the Gram Sabha land. The Magistrate has acted illegally and without application of judicial mind in taking cognizance on the charge sheet submitted under Sections 3/5 of the P.D.P.P. Act, 1984.

¶11

In any case, the question as to whether applicants had illegally encroached upon the land vested in Gram Sabha, recorded as public property, can only be adjudicated by the Revenue Authorities. The proper proceeding for eviction of the unauthorized occupant can be undertaken under Section 67 of the Revenue Code, 2006. The short-cut procedure adopted by the Lekhpal of the village concerned is nothing but with a view to harass the applicants.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application, but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments raised by learned counsel for applicants.

¶13

While dealing with similar issue, co-ordinate 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) , quashed the entire proceeding u/s 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and held that as far as criminal proceeding for illegal encroachment, damage or trespass over the land belonging to Gram Sabha is concerned, the same can be undertaken but it would be subject to the adjudication of rights of the parties over the land in dispute as the said determination can be done only by the revenue court. As far as the P.D.P.P. Act, 1984 is concerned, the same has been enacted with the specific purpose. The statement of objects and reasons of the said Act shows that it was enacted with a view to curb acts of vandalism and damage to public property including destruction and damage caused during riots and public commotion.

¶14

From perusal of the records, it transpires that present case is squarely covered with the judgment of co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Munshi Lal (supra) and as such the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants pursuant to Section of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, cannot but be said to be an abuse of the process of law or the Court. The cognizance/summoning order dated 06.10.2021 has been passed in complete ignorance of law. The continuation of criminal proceedings, in the considered opinion of the Court, being an abuse of process of the Court, ends of the justice requires that the said proceedings be quashed.

¶15

Invoking inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. of the High Court, entire proceedings of the Case No.793 of 2021 (State vs. Ashok Kumar and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.148 of 2021, under sections 3/5 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Bahariya, District- Prayagraj, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 15, Allahabad including charge-sheet no. 147 of 2021 dated 11.07.2021, cognizance/summoning order dated 06.10.2021 and bailable warrant dated 24.11.2022, are hereby quashed only in respect of applicants herein.

¶16

The instant application stands allowed accordingly.

¶17

Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Saif

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amrit Lal Patel and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrit Lal Patel and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases