An FIR cannot be quashed if a prima facie case is established from its contents.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2849/2021

Gopal Nath S/o Sh. Gulab Nath, Aged About 38 Years, Ward No.

11, Loonkaransar, District Bikaner (Raj.).

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

2.

Pankaj Kumar Tated S/o Sampat Lal, Ward No. 40,

Loonkaransar, District Bikaner (Raj.).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. D.S. Gharsana

For Respondent No.1

For Respondent No.2

:

:

Mr. Mukhtiyar Khan, PP

Mr. D.K. Gaur

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

04/01/2022

This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner

challenging the FIR No.126/2021 of Police Station Loonkaranasar,

District Bikaner for the offence under Sections 447 and 427 of IPC.

The said FIR has been lodged by the respondent No.2

alleging that his ancestral agricultural land is situated in Khasra

Nos.240 and 242. It is further alleged that the petitioner with the

intention to encroach over the land of the complainant has

removed the boundary wall fencing and put on some building

construction material over it. In the impugned FIR, the

investigation is going on.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner has not made any encroachment over the land of the

complainant. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, the

petitioner had purchased a piece of land from one Kishan through

a registered sale deed and got possession of the said land.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has, therefore, submitted that

(2 of 2)

the petitioner cannot be held guilty for protecting possession of his

own land and, as such, the offence under Sections 447 and 427

IPC is prima facie not made out against him. It is, therefore,

submitted that the impugned FIR may kindly be quashed.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned

counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 have vehemently

opposed the prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner and

submitted that from a bare reading of the impugned FIR, it is clear

that the petitioner has committed offence punishable under

Sections 447 and 427 IPC, therefore, no case for quashing the

impugned FIR is made out.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Haryana & Ors. V/s.

Bhajan Lal & Ors. reported in 1992 SCC (Cri) 426 and Rupan

Deol Bajaj (Mrs) & Anr. V/s. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill & Anr.

reported in 1995 SCC (Cri) 1059 and in later decisions has held

that if from a bare reading of the FIR, prima facie case is made

out, then FIR cannot be quashed.

Here in the present case, from a bare reading of the

impugned FIR, it is clear that prima facie case is made out,

therefore, no case for quashing the impugned FIR is made out.

Hence, this criminal misc. petition being devoid of any merit

is hereby dismissed.

Stay petition is also dismissed.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

17-Arun/-