Surendra Kumar And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 8364 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Surendra Kumar And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 25 August, 2025

Author: Saurabh Srivastava

Bench: Saurabh Srivastava

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:147777
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4833 of 2025
 
Court No. - 77
 
HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Order on Crl. Misc. Intervening Application No.nil of 2025

1. Heard Sri R.K. Gupta, learned counsel who preferred intervening application at the behest of one Sanjeev who is resident of Village Rohana Khurd, Tehsil and District Muzaffar Nagar.

2. By bare perusal of the intervening application, certain facts in respect of conducting election for Gram Pradhan, have been mentioned and the allegations put forward against accused/applicants, are broadly covered the FIR which is available with the petition preferred for challenging the entire proceedings arising out of 723 of 2022 but at no point of time, the prejudice caused to applicant/intervenor has ever been mentioned.

3. In sofar as locus of applicant/intervenor is concerned, nothing has been described in the intervening application and as such, it is not at all reflecting through intervening application that applicant/intervenor comes under the ambit of any prejudiced person or having any cause of action for contesting the matter which has been preferred at the behest of accused/applicants for challenging the proceedings initiated at the behest of prosecution, therefore, intervening application is hereby rejected.

Order on Petition

4. Heard Sri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA.

5. The instant application has been preferred to quash the chargesheet dated 06.01.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated 09.05.2023 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar along with entire proceeding of Case No.9965 of 2023 (State vs. Surendra Kumar and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.723 of 2022, under Section 447 IPC and Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District- Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar.

6. Brief facts of the present case are that in respect of property in dispute i.e. Gata No.548 area 0.0308 hectare, an civil suit bearing Original Suit No.739 of 1998 was preferred at the behest of applicants against Gram Sabha for permanent and prohibitory injunction. The said suit was contested by Gram Sabha and State of U.P. by filling their written submissions claiming that the property in dispute is a barren land and vide judgment and order dated 13.03.2003, learned court concerned decreed the said suit in favour of applicant no.3 by way of restraining the Gram Sabha and State from interfering in peaceful possession over the property in dispute. Being aggrieved with judgment and order dated 13.03.2003, Gram Sabha preferred Civil Appeal No.72 of 2003 before District Judge, Muzaffar Nagar which was allowed vide order dated 27.02.2010 by setting aside the order dated 13.03.2003. Applicant no.3 being aggrieved the order dated 27.02.2010, preferred Second Appeal No.484 of 2010 before this Court wherein vide order dated 06.05.2010, interim order in shape of maintaining status quo, was granted by this Court which is operating till date.

7. Thereafter, over the property in dispute, upon some complaints made by certain villagers, proceedings of eviction has been initiated and in consequence thereof, first information report dated 24.11.2022 bearing Case Crime No.723 of 2022 was lodged by opposite party no.2/Lekhpal concerned in pursuance to Section 447 IPC and Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against applicants alleging that property in disputed i.e. Gate No.548 area 0.0308 hectare which is recorded as barren land, has been encroached illegally by applicants and thus they had 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 06.01.2023 against applicants whereupon learned court concerned took cognizance of offence vide order dated 09.05.2023, which impugned the present application.

8. Learned counsel for applicants has challenged the entire proceedings of the present case as well as cognizance/summoning order along with chargesheet 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, 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. Learned counsel for applicants has also submitted that once, in respect of property in dispute, interim order is operating till today, in which circumstance, criminal proceeding has been initiated against applicants in spite of issuing mandatory notice under Section 441 IPC.

9. 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 opposite party no.2, is nothing but with a view to harass the applicants.

10. 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.

11. After hearing the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties, it is crystal clear that in respect of property in dispute, Second Appeal No.484 of 2010 is pending before this Court wherein vide order dated 06.05.2010, interim order in shape of maintaining status quo, was granted by this Court which is operating till date and in spite of that, present criminal proceeding has been initiated against applicants without issuing mandatory notice under Section 441 IPC for implicating them for offence under Section 447 IPC. In a similar matter, 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 initiated under Section 447 IPC and Section 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.

12. 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 and Section 447 IPC, cannot but be said to be an abuse of the process of law or the Court. The cognizance/summoning order dated 09.05.2023 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.

13. Invoking inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, chargesheet dated 06.01.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated 09.05.2023 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar along with entire proceeding of Case No.9965 of 2023 (State vs. Surendra Kumar and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.723 of 2022, under Section 447 IPC and Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District- Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar, are hereby quashed.

14. The instant application stands allowed accordingly.

15. However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the revenue authorities to proceed against applicants, if required, in accordance with the strict provisions of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 bearing in mind that interim order dated 06.05.2010 passed by this Court in Second Appeal No.484 of 2010, is still in operation.

August 25, 2025

Vivek Kr.