Allahabad High Court
Doctor Afzalur Rehman vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Homes, ... on 20 April, 2023
Bench: Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3848 of 2023
Applicant :- Doctor Afzalur Rehman
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Homes, Civil Secrtt. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Raza Zaheer
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.
Heard Sri Raza Zaheer, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused/ applicant for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of Case No.2252 of 2023 (State of U.P. vs. Doctor Afzalur Rehman), pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.18, Barabanki as well as the charge sheet No.1 dated 01.01.2023 filed under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Sections 2, 3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Zaidpur, District Barabanki in Case Crime No.198 of 2022, Police Station Zaidpur, District Barabanki and the cognizance orders dated 02.02.2023 and 28.02.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.18, Barabanki.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a false first information report came to be lodged against the present applicant, who is a senior citizen aged about 78 years and is a practicing Unani Doctor, on the basis of false and fabricated facts. The accused/ applicant is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in this case due to some ulterior reason.
His further submission is that the instant first information report in this matter came to be lodged malafidely at the behest of some opponent of the present applicant with whom, he has a civil litigation.
Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court emphatically to the fact that the first informant, who is a lekhpal, proceeded to get a first information report lodged in respect of some private land also, which is allegedly said to be transferred to someone else.
Learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently submitted that the first informant, who is none other than the lekhpal, was competent to take cognizance of alleged encroachment/ grabbing of land belonging to Gaon Sabha or State or any encroachment thereon. The first informant was none to lodge a first information report in respect of an alleged transfer to any other person.
His next submission is that had such person like lekhpal any grievance, he is free to initiate appropriate civil proceeding against the present applicant. However, he cannot be permitted to get the applicant prosecuted in a criminal matter, which is purely civil dispute.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently submitted that the law of quashing has been fairly settled in the celebrated judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 and R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866.
His further submission is that in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramveer Upadhyay vs. State of U.P. reported in AIR 2022 SC 2044 and Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 513, truthfulness or otherwise of the prosecution version or defence version cannot be looked into at this stage. At such an early stage to rush of this Court for quashing itself is an abuse of process of this Court as the trial has not progressed substantially.
Thus, in view of aforesaid, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record including the first information report and the charge sheet laid against the present applicant, it is true that the present informant, who is a lekhpal, was having no concern to get a first information report lodged about any such transaction, which was done in respect of land which does not belong to the State/ Gaon Sabha etc. However, from a perusal of content of first information report, it cannot be said that no offence under Sections 2/3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 is made out in the facts of this case. Therefore, this Court is of considered view that in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bhajan Lal's case (supra), R.P. Kapur's case (supra), Ramveer Upadhyay's case (supra) and Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan's case (supra), no ground for quashing the instant proceeding exists.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceedings as well as impugned charge sheet and impugned cognizance orders is refused as this Court does not find any illegality, impropriety and incorrectness in the proceedings under challenge. There is no abuse of court's process either.
However, it is needless to mention that if the applicant applies for grant of bail, the court below shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, in accordance with law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antill vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : MANU/SC/1024/2021 having regard to the fact that the present complainant/ first informant is a lekhpal, who could get a case lodged in respect of alleged encroachment in respect of land belonging to Gaon Sabha/ State for an offence related to damage to public property under Sections 2/3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, only.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant application is finally disposed of.
(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.)
Order Date :- 20.4.2023
cks/-
