IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that allegations must disclose a cognizable offence for criminal proceedings to continue, and the inherent powers to quash should be exercised sparingly.

JUDGMENT :

BIBHAS RANJAN DE, J.

1. The instant revision application has been preferred with a prayer for quashment of the proceedings in connection with A.C.G.R. No. 7191 of 2016 arising out of Haridevpur Police Station Case No. 712/2016 dated 22.12.2016 under Sections 341/506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC), presently pending before the Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court, Alipore.

2. The prayer for speedy disposal of the proceeding in connection with that instant case which is pending before the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court, Alipore has been made by the petitioner in connection with CRR 4190 of 2017.

3. Both this revision applications are taken up together for disposal via this common judgment.

Brief facts:

4. On 11.11.2016 at about 22:00 hours the petitioner herein in connection with CRR 1123 of 2018 along with another person came to the house of the opposite party no. 2 herein and directed the husband of the opposite party no. 2 to sign on some papers and to deliver duplicate key of the common car parking space otherwise they shall have to face dire consequences. Subsequently, the opposite party no. 2 found that somebody had put a padlock in the main entrance gate of the car parking space from outside and the car and other articles were inside that space.

4.1. Finally on 22.12.2016 at 2.30 hours when the opposite party no. 2 herein and her husband tried to open that padlock and enter into their premises at 73, Raja Rammohon Roy Road by taking assistance of a key maker, the accused/petitioner came to the spot and obstructed as well as threatened the key maker which resulted in the key maker leaving the subject premises. It was further alleged that the petitioner restrained the opposite party from entering into their own premises. He also obstructed and threatened the key maker which is a criminal offence.

4.2. Finally on 22.12.2016 the opposite party no. 2 filed a written complaint with the Haridevpur Police Station which resulted in initiation of Haridevpur Police Station Case No. 712/2016 under Section 341/506 of IPC against the petitioner herein.

4.3. During investigation Police collected statement of available witnesses and accordingly filed a charge sheet against the accused/petitioner under Section 341/506 of IPC. Subsequently, the accused surrendered before the Court of Ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on 26.12.2016 and was enlarged on bail. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned proceeding already mentioned above, the petitioner filed the instant revision application.

Arguments Advanced:

With respect to CRR 1123 of 2018:

5. Ld. Counsel, Mr. Sourav Chattejee, appearing on behalf of the petitioner in connection with CRR 1123 of 2018 has mainly contended that the entire dispute arose out of an altercation regarding open space which is purely civil in nature and no criminal proceeding should be allowed to proceed further.

6. Mr. Chatterjee has further argued that the facts and circumstances of the instant case make it amply clear that the opposite party no. 2 has instituted this proceeding in order to create pressure upon the developer to deliver the other car parking space in favour of her for which they do not have any right, title and interest.

7. Before parting with, Mr. Chatterjee has also raised objection towards the behavior of opposite party no. 2 which clearly shows that she is hell bent to use the process of criminal law to harass the petitioner herein with an ulterior motive to wreak vengeance.

8. In order to substantiate his claim, Mr. Chatterjee has relied on some cases which stand as follows:

(i) Haji Iqbal alias Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. 2023 SCC Online SC 946

(ii) Haji Iqbal alias Bala through S.P.O.A. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. 2023 SCC Online SC 948

(iii) State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors. 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335

(iv) Vineet Kumar Goel vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. 2017 (13) SCC 369

(v) Ahmad Ali Quarashi & Anr. vs. State of