Criminal proceedings against a public servant initiated without jurisdiction and based on a civil dispute are arbitrary and lead to abuse of process.

ORDER :

1. Petitioner who is accused No.4 has filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in C.C.No.391/2017 (PCR No.2/2012) on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC., Kollegal, for the offences punishable under Sections 427 r/w 34 of I.P.C.

2. In support of the petition, petitioner has contended that he was working as incharge Commissioner of Kollegal City Municipal Council ('CMC' for short). Since there was complaint regarding unauthorized occupation of certain lands and nuisance created by respondent No.2, he took steps to vacate the premises and cleared the nuisance. However, respondent No.2 choose to file a private complaint alleging offences punishable under Sections 120B, 323, 341, 425, 352, 504, 506B r/w Section 149 IPC. The learned Magistrate referred the same for investigation to the concerned police. After conducting the detailed investigation, the concerned police filed 'B' report. However, on the basis of protest petition filed by respondent No.2, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance.

3. The initiation and continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner is arbitrary, illegal and without any jurisdiction. Petitioner is a public servant. No ingredients of the offences are made out. The civil dispute is tried to be converted into a criminal proceedings. The continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and hence, the petition.

4. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon by the following decisions (i) D. Devaraja Vs. Owais Sabeer Hussain , (2020) 7 SCC 695 (ii) Manjeshwara and Ors. Vs. Dharme Gowda , W.P. No. 14238/2020 dated 07.01.2022.

5. On the other hand learned High Court Government Pleader submits that there is delay in filing the complaint. He would further submit that complainant and his siblings have purchased land in Sy.No.591/C measuring 0.18 cents and they got it converted for non-agriculture purpose. In the said property, complainant has got 60 x 83.5 feet to his share. In the said extent he has constructed house and living there in. About 30 years back, CMC Kollegal has formed sites in Sy.Nos.588 and 589 and distributed to homeless people. Abutting the property of complainant is the Bengaluru – Kollegal Main Road.

6. In respect of the said property, complainant has filed suit in O.S.No.185/2012 against CMC and it is pending consideration. However, accused persons used to instigate the residence and with their connivance, on 16.07.2012 in between 2.00 to 3.00 p.m, the accused persons demolished the construction made by the complainant and destroyed valuable timber stored for construction purposes. When complainant tried to prevent them, he was assaulted. No road has passed through the site of complainant. They acted in a high handled manner and his property is destroyed.

7. In this regard, the complainant filed private complaint. It was referred to the Dy.SP for investigation and he has filed B report. Considering the objections filed by the complainant, the trial Court has taken cognizance against accuse Nos.4 to 6 for the offence punishable under Section 427 r/w 34 IPC. There is prima facie material to proceed against the petitioner and pray to dismiss the petition.

8. Heard arguments and perused the record.

9. Undisputedly petitioner who is as accused No.4 is a public servant. At the time of incident, he was the in charge commissioner of CMC Kollegal. From the perusal of the material placed on record, it is evid