Shiv Kumar Singh @ Sheeru Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39633

Court No. - 74

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 8797 of 2025

Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Singh @ Sheeru Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

Present application has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 29.1.2024 along with cognizance/ summoning order dated 1.4.2024 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court Fatehpur in Criminal Case no. 7866 of 2024, State vs. Rishi Kumar Singh & others, as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case no. 7866 of 2024, State vs. Rishi Kumar Singh & others, arising out of Case Crime no. 925 of 2018, under Section 2/3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station Kotwali Fatehpur, District Fatehpur pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur in respect of applicant. Further it is prayed that proceedings of Criminal Case no. 7866 of 2024 be stayed during pendency of the application.

¶8

The instant application has been preferred for challenging the order dated 01.04.2024 through which cognizance has been taken up by learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur over the charge sheet dated 29.01.2024 after conduction of the detailed inquiry in pursuance to Case Crime no. 925 of 2018.

¶9

The present case has been instituted against the applicant and other 5 co-accused persons over the allegation as evident from the narration of the FIR itself that plot no. 2575/1 measuring 1.7400 hectare, 2575M measuring 0.162 hectare was illegally mutated in the name of accused persons including applicant.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant submitted that initially the plot in dispute has been mutated against the name of great grand father of the applicant and the nature of the plot was pond as entered in the revenue record and thereafter by the passage of time, the same was again mutated in the names of legal heirs of original owner

¶11

wherein the applicant is in the direct lineage of the person against whom the mutation has been carried out way back in the year 1952 itself, it is also mentioned in the FIR itself that the majority of the portion of the land has been occupied in shape of residential houses.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is hardly any case of Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 since the applicant is original owner in pursuance to the revenue entries which is available in favour of the descendants of the applicant since 1952 itself.

¶13

It is further submitted that there is hardly any attraction of sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC since the applicant being the lineage of the late Jagannath Singh and thereafter the other family members who are the real blood relative of the applicant who have been mutated against the same plot and the same has been verified at the stage of investigation which resulted into filing charge sheet only in pursuance to Section 2/3 of Act of 1984.

¶14

At the time of concluding the arguments, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that no proceeding has ever been initiated under the provisions contained in U.P.Revenue Code, 2006 for expunging the entries in the revenue record, if the same has been entered way back in the year 1952 itself over the property which is mentioned as pond and as such lodging FIR against the applicant and thereafter preferring a charge sheet is contrary to all cannons of fairness and reasonableness.

¶15

Per contra, learned AGA although vehemently opposed the prayer but did not disputed that it is not the case of damaging the public property whereas the instant matter relates to correction of the entries available in the revenue record, if found not sustainable, considering the nature of the plot that is recorded in revenue record as pond.

¶16

Considering the narration of the FIR as well as preferring of charge sheet after gap of near about 4 years wherein all the sections have already been omitted except section 2/3 of the Act of 1984, although the investigation has been conducted in pursuance to the allegation which has been put forward through the FIR but by bare perusal of the essence of the narration of the FIR as well as the conclusion drawn while closing the inquiry conducted by concerned Investigating officer which culminated into submission of the charge sheet clearly demonstrates that the matter belongs to

¶17

some wrong entries which has been made in the revenue record of the basic year itself. The correction of the records would not be amenable through the concerned State authorities by lodging FIR rather to get it corrected through the provisions contained under the U.P.Revenue Code, 2006 and as such the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime no. 0925 of 2018 instituted as Case no. 7866 of 2024 pending before learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur is hereby quashed and set aside.This order will not preclude the revenue authorities to initiate fresh proceedings at the civil side by way of seeking correction of the revenue records in the strict terms as defined under U.P.Revenue Code, 2006.

¶18

The instant application stands allowed accordingly.

¶19

Order Date :- 19.3.2025 Shaswat

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Kumar Singh @ Sheeru Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar Singh @ Sheeru Singh 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases