Chandra Shekhar Jha, J. – Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present quashing petition has been preferred to quash the entire proceedings in connection with Special Case No. 140 of 2014 arising out of Harijan P.S. Case No. 4 of 2012, where learned Additional District Judge-I cum Special Judge SC/ST Act, Patna took cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code (in short IPC) and Section 3(I)(IV)(XI)(XV) of the SC/ST Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the petitioners, vide order dated 03.09.2013.

3. Opposite Party No. 2 is duly represented.

4. From the crux of complaint petition it appears that one Ashok Paswan, son of Late Tapeshwar Paswan filed Complaint Case No. 27 (c) of 2012 against the petitioners, stating thereof that complainant has got ancestral house constructed her 3 decimals of land having one room having concrete roof and 3 rooms with asbestos sheet and some open agricultural land, which is now residential in nature. It was alleged that malguzari/rent was being issued by Danapur Municipality in the name of his mother Mitwa Devi. It was further alleged that since the family extended as such mother and all the brothers and nephew separated. It was alleged that as there was difficulty in making payment of rent in the name of mother so, the complainant remained deprived of government aid due to non-availability of receipt of the house as such he asked accused Shambhu Prasad Singh a co-villager for helping in mutation and gave him details of land and house. It was alleged that taking advantage of innocence of complainant accused persons took complainant and his wife to the Officer of Special Registrar, Danapur and got signature and thumb impression on several papers and non judicial stamp papers where, on inquiry it was said that names shall be mutated after inquiry by the officer and will take some time. Believing upon the words of Shambhu Prasad Singh the complainant and his wife put their signature. It was further alleged that on 05.07.2011 accused Shambhu Prasad Singh took complainant and his wife in the office of Danapur Municipality again in the name of mutation and assured that their name will be mutated and receipt shall be issued to them. It was alleged that the accused Shambhu Prasad Singh and Manish Kumar on being asked for rent receipt, ignored. The complainant further alleged that from villagers he came to know that Shambhu Prasad Singh and Manish Kumar are trying to sell the house and land of the complainant thereupon he made inquiry in Danapur Municipality, where he was informed that no such application for mutation was filed. The complainant further alleged that the Katib (scriber) Pramod Kumar informed that two Power of Attorneys in the name of Shambhu Prasad Singh and Manish Kumar has been executed upon by which complainant was shocked. The complainant claimed that he never executed any Power of Attorney, rather it was fraudulently obtained. The complainant further alleged that he asked Shambhu Prasad Singh and Manish Kumar to not sell the land and to cancel aforesaid Power of Attornies and for said purpose sent legal notice on 29.11.2011. The complainant alleged that on 08.01.2012 all the accused persons came to the house of the complainant and abused him and threatened them to evict the house, where they assaulted complainant and his wife. It is submitted that the Learned ACJM, Danapur after receiving the complaint sent it to the SC/ST Police Station, Patna upon which the Harijan P.S. Case No. 4 of 2012 was instituted against the petitioners.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that complaint petition bearing no. 27 (c) of 2012 is not supported by affidavit, which appears in violation of legal ratio as settled through decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Priyanka Srivastava and Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Othe