Allahabad High Court
Praveen vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 August, 2025
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135863
Court No. - 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25391 of 2025
Applicant :- Praveen
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Anuj Chaudhary
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Anuj Chaudhary, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A for the State-respondent.
2. By means of the present application, applicant has sought quashing of charge sheet dated 16.01.2021 in Case Crime no. 333/2020 under Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, PS- Thana Bhawan, District Shamli. Further prayer has been made to stay proceeding of Case Crime no. 333/2020.
3. Brief facts of the present case are that a first information report dated 21.11.2020 bearing Case Crime No.333 of 2020 was lodged by Lekhpal/opposite party no.2 in pursuance of Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against applicant and 11 other co-accused alleging that applicant and the other co-accused has encroached illegally over plot which is School Farm land. The applicant had, thus, caused damage and loss to the public property. After lodging of the FIR, the concerned Investigating Officer started inquiry and after conclusion of the same, preferred charge-sheet on dated 16.01.2021 against applicant whereupon learned court concerned has taken cognizance/summoning of offence vide order dated 25.03.2021 which impugned the present petition.
4. Learned counsel for applicant has challenged the chargesheet on several other ground 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, 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 Section 3 of the P.D.P.P. Act, 1984.
5. In any case, the question as to whether applicant had illegally encroached upon the land vested in Gram Sabha, 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 applicant. No proceeding has ever been initiated in pursuance to Section 67 of U.P.Revenue Code, 2006 which clearly defines in respect of demolition if any illegal/unauthorized construction has ever been raised by any of the encroacher but by way of implicating applicant in criminal litigation in shape of Case Crime no. 333/2020 will not serve the purpose for which applicant has been alleged.
6. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant petition but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments raised by learned counsel for applicant.
7. 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.
8. 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 applicant pursuant to Section 3 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 25.03.2021 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.
9. Invoking inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS of the High Court, entire proceedings of the Case Crime no. 333/2020 under Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, PS- Thana Bhawan, District Shamli is hereby quashed only in respect of applicant namely Praveen.
10. The instant application stands allowed.
Order Date :- 11.8.2025
Shaswat
