The central legal point established in the judgment is that the allegations must fulfill the essential ingredients for the alleged offenses under the IPC sections mentioned, and the court may quash orders taking cognizance if the allegations do not meet these requirements.

JUDGMENT :

Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the order dated 26.02.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge- II, Palamau at Daltonganj in Criminal Revision No 97/2015 and for quashing of order dated 29.06.2022 passed by Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palamau whereby cognizance in connection with Complainant Case No. 585/2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 423/420/467/468/ 471/143/147/447/323/342/504 of IPC has been taken inter alia against the petitioners.

3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 purchased land belonging to the complainant-informant from the accused Rahul Kumar Choubey and Rohit Kumar Choubey though Rahul Kumar Choubey and Rohit Kumar Choubey did not have any right, title and interest for executing the sale deed in favour of the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 and on 16.12.2012, the petitioners armed with sharp cutting weapons, obstructed the cultivation work of the complainant and threatened to assault him and scuffled with him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits relying upon the Relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mohammed Ibrahim & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Anr., reported in (2009) 8 SCC 751, para 8 of which, reads as under:-

“8. This Court has time and again drawn attention to the growing tendency of the complainants attempting to give the cloak of a criminal offence to matters which are essentially and purely civil in nature, obviously either to apply pressure on the accused, or out of enmity towards the accused, or to subject the accused to harassment. Criminal courts should ensure that proceedings before it are not used for settling scores or to pressurise parties to settle civil disputes. But at the same time, it should be noted that several disputes of a civil nature may also contain the ingredients of criminal offences and if so, will have to be tried as criminal offences, even if they also amount to civil disputes. (See G. Sagar Suri v. State of U.P. [(2000) 2 SCC 636 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 513] and Indian Oil Corpn. v. NEPC India Ltd. [(2006) 6 SCC 736 : (2006) 3 SCC (Cri) 188]) Let us examine the matter keeping the said principles in mind.”

Submits that in this case, undisputedly, Rahul Kumar Choubey and Rohit Kumar Choubey are claiming that the property conveyed is their property and there is no allegation of any impersonation hence, Rahul Kumar Choubey and Rohit Kumar Choubey were under bonafide belief that the property sold by them to the petitioners; actually belongs to them. The petitioner no. 1 and 2 are the purchasers of the property hence no offence punishable under Sections 423/420/467/468 of IPC is made out against the petitioners. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the disputed fact remains that the property after being purchased by the petitioner no. 1 and 2 has been mutated in their name and the correction slip has been issued in their favour, the copy of which has been kept as page 89 and 94 of the brief, which are the documents of unimpeachable character, being the certified copy of the concerned correction slip issued by the Circle Officer, Bishrampur Circle.

5. So far as the offences punishable under Sections 143/147 of the IPC is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in order to constitute the offence punishable under Sections 143 and 147 of IPC, the essential ingredient is that the accused is a member of an unlawful assembly and the common object of the assembly is one of the five crimes specified in Section 141 of the IPC which reads as under :

“Section 141: Unlawful Assembly-An assembly of five or more persons is designated an “unlawful assembly”, if the common object of the persons composing that assembly is— First.—To overawe by criminal force, or show of criminal force, the Central or a