IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established is that the continuation of a criminal prosecution, when the dispute appears to be purely civil and a civil suit is already filed, may amount to an abuse of process of law.

JUDGMENT :

Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the entire criminal prosecution arising out of Chas (M) P.S. Case No.63 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.1029 of 2017 including the order taking cognizance dated 31.08.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Bokaro whereby and where under the learned Magistrate took cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 506 and 37 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has sold some land in excess to the land he has purchased. Hence, it is alleged that he has committed forgery. Police after investigation of the case has submitted charge-sheet inter alia against the petitioner for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 504, 37 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Bokaro has found prima facie case only against the petitioner for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 504, 37 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute between the parties is purely a civil dispute. The petitioner has not sold any land to the informant. The purchasers of the land of the petitioner have no grievance against the petitioner. There is no allegation against the petitioner of impersonating as somebody else in executing sale-deeds. It is next submitted that the petitioner was the bonafide owner of the land in question in respect of which he has executed sale-deeds, on the date of execution of the sale deed. Hence, no forgery has been committed by the petitioner. Similarly, there is no allegation against the petitioner of cheating anybody and the allegation of criminal intimidation is not against the petitioner rather it is against the accused persons as mentioned in paragraph-10 of the written report on the basis of which the F.I.R. of the case has been registered. It is next submitted that the informant is a builder and has used muscle-men to pressurize the land owners to sell their land and when the co-accused refused to sell the plot, they were threatened and harassed including foisting of this false case against them and the petitioner. It is further submitted that the informant has adopted these tactics to obstruct the road of the adjoining land owners and despite the order of the Circle Officer in Encroachment Case No.01/2015-16, the encroachment has not been removed. It is next submitted that the petitioner has filed Title Suit No.64 of 2014 for specific performance before the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division-1st, Bokaro which is pending for adjudication and the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged as a counter-blast to the earlier Civil Suit for wrecking vengeance. It is also submitted that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen and has not committed any illegality. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal prosecution arising out of Chas (M) P.S. Case No.63 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.1029 of 2017 including the order taking cognizance dated 31.08.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Bokaro, be quashed and set aside.

5. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 vehemently oppose the prayer to quash the entire criminal prosecution arising out of Chas (M) P.S. Case No.63 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.1029 of 2017 including the order taking cognizance dated 31.08.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Bokaro. Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 submits that since the petitioner has committed the offence and charge-sheet has been submitted against him, hence, the learned Magistrate has rightly found sufficient materials to find the prima facie case for the offences punishable in