The main legal point established in the judgment is that criminal proceedings should not be used as a shortcut for civil remedies, and the court has the power to quash proceedings if the allegations do not constitute an offense or if the proceedings are maliciously instituted.

JUDGMENT

S.K. Panigrahi, J. - This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Cr.P.C.' for brevity) has been filed with a prayer to quash the proceedings of 1.C.C. No.22 of 2019 pending before the learned Special Judge, Jagatsinghpur for commission of the alleged offences under Sections 441/ 442/ 467/ 468/ 384/ 387 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'the I.P.C.' for brevity) read with Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SC and ST (PA) Act' for brevity), and all proceedings consequent thereto.

2. The facts of the present case, in short, are summarized herein below:

(a). One Promod Kumar Lenka, an Advocate in Jagatsinghpur is disposed of towards Petitioner No.3 because of professional rivalry. The Petitioner No.1 is an Assistant Teacher in Galupada Atamal U.P. School, Petitioner No.2 is a Superintendent of Sishu Ashram, Jagatsinghpur, Petitioner No.3 is a Government Counsel, Petitioner No.4 is a retired Government employee. Because of avocation, the Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 reside at Jayabada and they are visitors to the house of Petitioner No.4, who resides in his house with his other family members. The Petitioner No.3 has been adopted since childhood to the Acharya family who has their separate house in the village. The Petitioner No.2 is a resident full- time at Sishu Ashram, Jagatsinghpur and he was visiting to his parents on holiday. The house of Petitioner No.4 is near that of the Opposite Party No.2 approachable through a black-topped public road, a part of which is claimed by Opposite Party No.2 as his ancestral land though it is used as public road.

(b). The dispute between Petitioners and Opposite Party No.2 arose when the local self-Government authority decided to construct a cement-concrete road over the existing black-topped road leading to the wife of Opposite Party No.2 to lodge a written report at Jagatsinghpur Police Station against the municipal staff supervising the construction work of the road which had been contracted to one Raghunath Mohanty.

(c). On 19.09.2019, the Opposite Party No.2 lodged a written report at Jagatsinghpur Police Station against the Petitioner No.3 and three others, which was registered as Jagatsinghpur P.S. Case No.311 of 2019. During investigation of the aforesaid case, the Opposite Party No.2 filed 1.C.C. No.22 of 2019 on 07.12.2019 before the court of learned Special Judge, Jagatsinghpur against the Petitioners. Prior thereto, on 20.10.2019, Raghunath Mohanty to whom the road construction had been entrusted had lodged a written report at Jagatsinghpur Police Station against the Opposite Party No.2, his wife and others and the same was registered as Jagatsinghpur P.S. Case No.355 of 2019.

(d). On 26.11.2019, the Opposite Party No.2 blocked the road, thereby the family members of Petitioner No.4 denied to go out of their house leading to a written report being lodged at Jagatsinghpur P.S. by Petitioner No.3 against Opposite Party No.2, his wife and another. The written report was registered as Jagatsinghpur P.S. Case No.427 of 2019. One Sulochana Devi, wife of Petitioner No.4 also lodged FIR on 01.12.2019 against Opposite Party No.2 and three others and the same was registered as Jagatsinghpur P.S. Case No.431 of 2019.

(e). On 29.11.2019, the Opposite Party No.2 filed C.S. No.443 of 2019 and I.A. No.302 of 2019 against the Executive Officer and Junior Engineer of Jagatsinghpur Municipality, Raghunath Mohanty, the Contractor and Petitioner No.3. Thereafter, on 07.12.2019, Petitioner No.3 filed C.S. No.460 of 2019 and I.A. No.314 of 2019 against Opposite Party No.2 and three others.

(f). It is further stated that the land in question where the road exists has been in existence as public road since years together and in lieu of that portion, the father of Opposite Party No.2 has been given Government land of same a