SHORT NOTE
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
U.C. Dhyani, J.
Bachan Singh and Ors. —Applicants
versus
State of Uttarakhand and Anr. —Respondents
Criminal Misc. Application No. 282 of 2014
Decided on 20.8.2014

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 147, 379 and 149 — Cognizance of offences and summoning order in a private complaint — Magistrate also found prima facie case made out for framing charge after pre-charge evidence was recorded — Revision — Complainant had filed injunction suit in respect of land subject matter of complaint which was dismissed by court — Appeal against order of civil court was also dismissed — Verdict of civil court was in favour of applicant in respect of land in question — Applicant thus could not be held to have taken away the crop from the land which belonged to complainant — Charge sheet and proceedings pending before Magistrate were liable tobe quashed.

       Held: A perusal of the judgments rendered by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tehri Garhwal and learned Additional District Judge, Tehri Garhwal will reveal that the civil suit and appeal thereof filed by respondent No.2 in respect of the land, which is mentioned in the criminal complaint case, has been dismissed. In other words, the description of land in the criminal complaint case filed by respondent No.2, original suit and civil appeal arising there from are the same. The applicant No. 1 has been held to be the bhumidhar in possession of the land, in respect of which the respondent No.2 alleged that the applicants committed theft of their crop. When the land in question has been held to be in possession of the applicant No.1, how can it be said that he alongwith co-applicants committed theft of the crop standing thereon?

       There is verdict of Civil Court in favour of the applicant No. 1 in respect of the land in question. The allegations levelled against the applicants, in the criminal complaint case, therefore fall on the ground. No allegation even prima facie, is substantiated against the applicants in respect of offences punishable under Sections 147, 379 and 149, I.P.C.

       When foundation of criminal offence is not laid against the applicants, therefore, this Court should quash the proceedings pending against them, in view of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander and another, (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 986. The applicants succeed in view of the aforesaid discussion and as a consequence thereof, criminal proceedings pending against them in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal (being Criminal Case No. 346/2014), titled as Shoorvir Singh and Bachan Singh and others, are set aside.

       Result: Petition allowed.