Vijay Singh @ Bijay Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand & Another ..... ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 2509 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Vijay Singh @ Bijay Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand & Another ..... ... on 10 February, 2025

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  Cr.M.P. No. 2063 of 2020

     Vijay Singh @ Bijay Singh, aged about 48 years, Son of Thakur
     Singh, resident of ITI More, P.O. Chas, P.S.- Pindrajora, District-
     Bokaro.                                     ..... Petitioner
                             Versus
     The State of Jharkhand & Another            ..... Opp. Parties
                              ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

--------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rama Kant Tiwari, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, Spl.P.P.

---------

Order No. 06/Dated: 10 February, 2025 th

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned

Spl.P.P., Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal for the State.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed for quashing the

entire criminal proceeding of C.P. Case No. 747 of 2018 (Forest),

including the order dated 20.07.2019 passed by learned Judicial

Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokar whereby the cognizance for the offence

under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Bihar Amendment

Act, 1989) has been taken against the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has

been dragged in this case for making construction on the portion of

Plot No. 370 which has been claimed by the forest officials as "Forest

land" notified under Section 29 of the Indian Forest Act, while the

Forest Settlement Officer, Dhanbad in Forest Settlement Case No. 55

of 1963-64 had passed the order that Plot No. 370 along with four

other plots are raiyati land. Placing reliance upon the order/judgment

passed in Cr.M.P. No. 479 of 2009 dated 26.06.2015 Bharat Singh

Versus State of Jharkhand and Another (Annexure-5). It is further

submitted that in similar matter, criminal proceedings with respect to

the Plot No. 370 was initiated by the forest officials claiming it to be

the Forest land has been quashed by this Honb'le Court.

4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that

for the same piece of land one another case i.e., C.P. Case No. 657 of

2015(F) was instituted against the same petitioner and was

challenged before this Hon'ble Court which has been allowed by the

Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.06.2023 passed

in Cr.M.P. No. 2841 of 2022 and entire criminal proceeding has been

quashed.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the

further proceeding of the Complaint Case lodged in respect of same

property against the same petitioner will amount the abuse of the

process of the Court and the same should be quashed.

6. Learned Spl.P.P appearing for the State opposed the prayer of the

petitioner, but not disputed the fact that in similar case, the criminal

proceeding has been quashed.

7. In view of above, present petition is allowed and entire criminal

proceeding including the order taking cognizance as well as further

proceedings with respect to the C.P. Case No. 747 of 2018 (Forest)

is quashed.

8. Accordingly, I.A. No. 4217 of 2023 is disposed of.

[[

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Simran/