ORDER :

1) The petitioners have filed this petition for quashing the chargesheet bearing No. 133 of 2013 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur, the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 594 of 2013 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surajpur and all consequential proceedings including the order dated 29.01.2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Surajpur, District Surajpur in Criminal Revision No. 49 of 2019.

2) The facts of the present case are that respondent No.2 lodged a written report on 05.11.2012 alleging that on 09.06.2012 the petitioners entered into the land belonging to the complainant’s mother and assaulted the complainant and threatened him for life. On such information, the police registered the FIR against the petitioners on 01.03.2013 for the commission of an offence punishable under Sections 447, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. At the same time, respondent No.2 filed a complaint case under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. alleging that on 09.06.2012, the petitioners entered into the land bearing survey No. 2706/1, 2707/1 and 2708/1 situated at Main Road, Surajpur and illegally started construction over it and when the complainant made efforts to stop the construction work the petitioners got annoyed, they abused him, pushed him and threatened him for life.

3) The FIR was registered by the Police on 01.03.2013 whereas the learned trial Court took cognizance of the complaint case on 12.12.2012. The learned trial Court framed charges against the petitioners for the commission of an offence punishable under Sections 447, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC on 11.12.2019 in Criminal Case No. 594 of 2013. The petitioners preferred a criminal revision against the order framing charge dated 11.12.2019 but the same has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge Surajpur, District Surajpur in Criminal Revision No. 49 of 2019 vide order dated 29.01.2020.

4) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the complaint case was filed against respondent No.2 by petitioner No.1 prior to 29.08.2012 whereas the written report was lodged against the petitioners on 05.11.2012 and the delay part has not been explained properly in both the cases. He would further submit that the learned trial Court has taken cognizance of the complaint case as well as the final report submitted by the police and in the police case, the learned trial Court has framed charges. He would also submit that the learned trial Court ought to have complied with the provisions of Section 210 of Cr.P.C. He would place reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the matter of Kapil Agarwal and Others vs. Sanjay Sharma and Others, reported in (2021) 5 SCC 524.

5) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioners in the instant petition have challenged the criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 594 of 2013 parties being “State of Chhattisgarh vs. Ratanlal Agrawal and Others” including the final report. He would support the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Court. He has placed reliance on the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sankaran Moitra vs. Sadhna Das and Another, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 58 and Dilawar Singh vs. State of Delhi, reported in (2007) 12 SCC 641.

6) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents carefully.

7) It appears that respondent No.2 filed a complaint case on 05.11.2012 alleging that on 09.06.2012 the petitioners entered into the land bearing survey Nos. 2706/1, 2707/1 and 2708/1 situated at Main Road, Surajpur and illegally raised construction over the said piece of land. Prior to that, on the same date i.e. on 05.11.2012, a written report was lodged before the Police Station Surajpur. The police registered the FIR for the commission of an offence punishable under Sections 447 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC against the petitioners. The FIR was lodged on 01.03.2013 whereas the char