PITABAS BEHERA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application U/S. 482 of Cr.P.C. by 44 petitioners seeking to quash the entire criminal proceeding instituted against them after setting aside the order passed on 2/5/2018 by the learned J.M.F.C., Nimapara in I.C.C. Case No. 201 of 2017 taking cognizance of offences U/Ss. 147, 148, 294, 323, 324, 457, 506, 380, 436, 149 of IPC.

(2.) The facts in precise are that on 18/5/2017 O.P. No.2 instituted a complaint against the petitioners in I.C.C. Case No. 110 of 2017 in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Nimapara who by an order passed on 20/5/2017 sent the complaint to I.I.C., Astaranga Police Station U/S. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for registration and investigation. Accordingly, the IIC registered Astaranga P.S. Case No. 35 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 453 of 2017 and conducted investigation, but he finding the complaint to be false and fabricated submitted final report as false vide FIR No. 41 dtd. 30/6/2017, whereafter O.P. No.2 filed a protest petition in shape of complaint in I.C.C. No. 201 of 2017 in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Nimapara who after recording initial statement of O.P. No.2 and conducting enquiry by recording the statements of witnesses upon perusal of complaint took cognizance of offences U/Ss. 147, 148, 294, 323, 324, 457, 506, 380, 436, 149 of IPC and issued NBWs against the petitioners by the impugned order. It is stated in the protest petition by O.P. No.2 that he along with others are in continuous possession of land in plot No. 508 of Khata No. 88 of Mouza River Block measuring 175 acres as per the order of the Supreme Court, but such land being the river bed has been filled up with earth, thereby has become a high-rise land and they have been continuously enjoying such land by planting casuarina and cashew-nut trees, but on 30/6/2017, at about 10 A.M. the petitioners being armed with different weapon of offences trespassed into such land and damaged such trees by cutting it and when O.P. No.2 protested, they abused him in filthy language as well threatened and assaulted him as well as entered into the houses of O.P. No. 2 and others and stole away different household articles by setting fire to such houses.

(3.) In the course of hearing of the CRLMC, Ms. D. Mahapatra, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners and their ancestors were/are in continuous possession of the land in question for last 70 years by virtue of a lease granted by Tahasildar and since the lease of the petitioners was expired and not renewed, the petitioners had approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 809 of 2010 which was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court on 3/8/2023 directing the Sub-Collector, Puri to examine the matter after hearing the petitioners and sixty interveners in I.A. No. 1952 of 2019 and pass fresh order in Temporary Lease Case No. 210 of 1990 after verifying the case records, but O.P. No.2 with false averments made in the complaint and protest petition has falsely implicated the petitioners. It is further submitted that since the complaint lodged by O.P. No.2 being investigated into by the Police in Astaranga P.S. Case No. 35 of 2017 after it was sent U/S 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. with submission of final report by the I.O. as false, there is no rhyme and reason to take cognizance of offences by ignoring the materials collected in the investigation conducted by the Police. It is also strongly urged by Ms. Mahapatra that there is absolutely no material on record to find out any primafacie case U/S 436 of IPC and thereby, the present case being civil in nature as well as motivated one, the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioners is nothing sort of an abuse of process of Court and liable to be quashed. Ms. Mahapatra accordingly has prayed to quash the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioners by setting aside the order taking cognizance and issuance of process.