NOOR BOX Vs. STATE OF W B

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present hearing arises out of an application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the charge-sheet being charge-sheet No. 31/2002 dated 15.6.2002 submitted under Sections 447/379/506 of the Indian Penal Code filed in connection with Daspur P.S. Case No. 22/2002 corresponding to G.R.Case No. 96/2002 pending before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ghatal in the District of Midnapore.

(2.) In short the case of the petitioners is that the. petitioner No. 1 purchased 16 decimals of land from the defacto-comptainant, O.P. No. 2 after paying consideration amount of Rs. 999/- and the said transfer was made by a registered deed of sale. O.P. No. 2 purchased the land described in the schedule of the petition by a registered sale deed dated 22.3.1971 from Sk. Hessamuddin and sold the same to the petitioners No. 1 as stated above on 26.3.1971. It is alleged that O.P. No. 2 filed an application under Section 4 of the West Bengal Restoration of Alienated Land Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and after hearing the parties, the learned Special Officer appointed under the said Act allowed the said application filed by O.P.No. 2. Against such order, dated 6.12.83, the petitioner No. 1 preferred an appeal before the appellate authority that is to say Sub- Divisional Land and Land Reforms Officer, Ghatal. The said appeal was ultimately allowed by the appellate authority who set aside the order passed by the Special Officer and the order was passed on 8.10.88. It is further alleged that challenging the order dated 8.10.88 passed by the appellate authority, the O.P.No.2 filed an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before this Court, which was registered as C.O.No. 1043/99. By an order dated 3rd May, 1999, a learned Single Judge of this Court directed the petitioner No. 1 not to change the nature and character of the suit property. It is further alleged that the O.P.No 2 filed a purported complaint dated 7.3.2002 before the S.D.J.M., Ghatal wherein the said O.P.alleged that on 4.3.2002 accused persons along with 8 to 10 persons violated the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta. With the help of stick and other dangerous weapons illegally entered into the land located in above mentioned Dag No. 2 (mentioned in the schedule), caught fish from the pond, under occupation of O.P.No. 2, and fled away. On the basis of the said complaint learned SDJM, Ghatal directed the police to investigate the matter under Section 156(3) Criminal Procedure Code treating the complaint as FIR and the police on the basis of such direction started the above mentioned case and on completion of the investigation, submitted the charge-sheet.

(3.) Through the instant application, the petitioners have alleged that the G.R.case in question which is pending before the learned SDJM, Ghatal is an out-come of persona! rivalry between the petitioners and the O.P.No. 2 and the charge-sheet submitted on the basis of the investigation done by the police should to quashed, on the grounds that the learned Court below acted illegally with material irregularities while taking cognizance by an order dated 17.12.2002 on the basis of the charge-sheet filed on 15.6.2002 without appreciating the fact that on the self-same cause of action a civil case was pending before this Court, which is required to be heard by the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, on the further allegation that the learned Court below failed to appreciate that if there was any violation of the order dated 3.5.1999 passed by the High Court, the O.P.No. 2 could have easily filed an application under Article 215 of the Constitution of India. But in order to put pressure upon the petitioners, the O.P. No. 2 had taken shelter of the criminal law and on a further allegation that even if the alfegations made in the petition of complaint filed by O.P. No. 2 on 7.3.2002 have been taken at their face value and accepted in their entirity, these do not prima facie constitute any offence and make out any case against the petitioners. The allegation has also been raised that the charge-sheet submitted by the police is vague one and the same does not disclose any prima facie offence against the petitioners.