Quashing of criminal proceedings due to lack of sufficient evidence and failure to consider prior relevant filings by the opposite party.

JUDGMENT :

PURNENDU SINGH, J.

Heard Mr. Tej Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. / 528 BNSS for quashing of the order dated 20.02.2020 passed in Complaint Case No.525(C)/2019, by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Masaurhi, by which he has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 193 , 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code . He further seeks quashing of entire proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No.525(C)/2019.

3. Brief facts of the case are that dispute arises out of a piece of land, relating to a property located in village Kadimpur Nima (now known as Nima), Paragna Sandha, P.S. Massaurhi (now Dhanarua), District Patna, appertaining to Khata No.231, Khesra Nos.1489 and 1490. Petitioner claims himself to be the descendant of one late Hittan Singh, in whose share, the aforesaid land came into possession as per the judgment and decree passed in Title Partition Suit No.35 of 1924. The opposite party no.2/complainant is also descendant of said late Hittan Singh. The petitioner was in peaceful possession of the said land, over which he is residing in his ancestral paucca building. The complaint Case No.525(C)/2019 was instituted on 21.09.2019 by the complainant/opposite party no.2, alleging therein that the petitioner has forged/maunpulated the document relating to Title Suit No.35 of 1924, showing the land/property in issue to be his ancestral land for wrongful gain and obtained order in his favour in measurement case being MC No.60/2016-17 and BLDR Case No.62/2017-18, filed by the complainant.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that in course of hearing in the aforesaid cases, filed by the complainant, the petitioner had also produced certified copy of the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No.35 of 1924 on 22.05.2018 to show that no interpolation of any kind or manner was made in the judgment and decree. Learned counsel submitted that in fact the opposite party no.2 is own Gotia and he is indulged in filing frivolous cases against the petitioner one after other. O.P. No.2/complainant had filed of CWJC No.3956 of 2018 and MJC No.4501 of 2018. O.P. No.2 has also filed a writ petition being Criminal Writ Jurisdiction No.1117 of 2019 against the petitioner for a direction to the respondents to make an inquiry under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. in which also the same allegations were made against the petitioner. Suppressing the said information what has happened after the complaint was filed before the concerned Judicial Magistrate having jurisdiction, O.P. No.2 has resorted to file another complaint to drag the petitioner on false accusation. Learned counsel further submitted that the learned Magistrate in the most mechanical manner without perusing all the materials on record proceeded to take cognizance vide order dated 20.02.2020 under Sections 193 , 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC. On these grounds, learned counsel submitted that the order taking cognizance is fit to be set aside and quashed including the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Complaint Case No.525(c)/2019.

5. O.P. No.2 is absent.

6. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State submitted that vide order dated 14.07.2025, this Court passed the order, staying the further proceeding pending in the district court concerned in respect of the complaint No. 525(c)/2019. He further submitted that primarily the present dispute arises out of family property, over which