Advocates:
['MOEEZ UDDIN', 'G A', '', 'VIRENDRA SINGH PARMAR']

Reserved on 3.8.2022

Delivered on 25.8.2022

Court No. -77

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12385 of 2022

Applicant :- Bajrang Bahadur Patel And 7 Others

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Moeez Uddin

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Virendra Singh Parmar

Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.

By moving this application under section 482 of Cr..PC the

applicants seek to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this court to

quash the entire proceedings in Special Sessions Trial number 385

of 2021 State versus Surya Bhan and others, arising out of case

crime number 237 of 2018, under sections 504 506, 447, 147 IPC

and Section 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST Act, police station Phulpur District

Prayagraj in pursuance of chargesheet number 345/2019 dated

24.8.2019, pending in the court of Special Judge SC/ST Act

Allahabad.

In the affidavit, it is asserted that opposite party no. 2 Brij Lal

initiated the Original Suit No. 2568 of 2011 against applicants

regarding araji number 261 area 0.334 hactare for permanent

injunction and procured ex-parte injunction against the applicants

vide order dated 21st November 2011 of Additional Civil Judge,

Junior Division, Allahabad. The applicants are appearing therein

regularly. After that Civil Suit the opposite party no. 2 by way of an

application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. lodged FIR number 277 of

2012 dated 26.9.2012 under section 147, 382, 504, 506 IPC and

section 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST Act, wherein after investigation, final

report was submitted on 18.12.2012. A protest petition was filed

and it was treated as a complaint. Again the opp. party no. 2

through an application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. got registered

FIR No. 362 of 2014, under section 147, 382, 504, 506 IPC and

Section 3 (2) V of SC/ST Act regarding the incident dated

14.4.2013 against which the application under 482 Cr.P.C. of the

applicants was rejected. The Investigating Officer after

investigation in the matter exonerated six accused persons and

chargesheet number 9 /2015 was filed on 3.3.2015 against two

applicants wherein they have been bailed out. It is further alleged

that the applicants gave a threat to the witnesses who filed a

complaint in this connection against the applicants. Thirdly through

an application under 156 (3) Cr.P.C. regarding incident dated

12.4.2014 case crime number 181 /2016 under sections 147, 382,

504, 506 IPC and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was lodged by the opposite

party no. 2. After investigation again the investigating officer filed

final report no. 10 of 2016 dated 24th June 2016. After hearing, the

protest application of the opp. party no. 2 was treated as a

complaint against the applicants. Fourthly a first information report

as case crime number 237 of 2018 regarding incident dated 15th

April 2018 under section 382, 504, 506, 120 -B IPC and section

3(2) (v) of SC/ST Act was lodged against the applicants by the

opposite party no.2. Wherein the statement of opposite party no. 2

could have been recorded after one year i.e. on 10th June 2019

and after a complaint given by the applicants the investigation

could be completed and chargesheet dated 24th August 2019 was

submitted against applicants which has been challenged in the

present proceedings. Fifthly an FIR number 568 /2020 was

registered by the opp. party no. 2 on 11.12.2020 regarding incident

dated 5th April 2019, under section 147 504, 506, 352, 379 IPC

and 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act wherein after investigation the

investigating officer filed a Final report.

It is argued by the applicants’ counsel that the applicants are

innocent farmers and opposite party no.2 being a practising

2 of 6

advocate in this court is harassing them by continuously filing false

cases on the same allegations that the applicants are trampling

down his crops. While the applicants are in the actual possession

over the disputed property and the crops are bein