SHIV KUMAR PODDAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this miscellaneous application prayer is for quashing the order dated 20.6.1997 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Purnia, by which cognizance under Sections 148. 149, 447, 448, 379 and 427. of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner in connection with Complaint Case No. 224 of 1996.

(2.) IN short, the prosecution case, as spelt out in the complaint petition, is that the complainant is a privileged person. His house stands on 1 -1/2 decimals of land on Plot No. 52 where he is living with his family members. According to him, in a portion of Plot No. 51, one Sameer Ansari, son of Kallar Ansari of Birouli has his house over an area of 4 decimals of land and he has got a privileged persons homestead tenancy purcha for the said land. Sameer Ansari lives in that house with his family members. It is alleged that one accused Himayu Ansari alias Khursid Ansari is a designing fellow and he somehow managed to obtain a privileged persons homestead tenancy purcha for a piece of land out of Plot No. 52 in his favour by influencing the then C.O Noor Alam, a casteman of his, though he had no residential house over any portion of Plot No. 52. Said Himayu Ansari had earlier made attempt to dislodge the complainant from his house, but the same was aborted since he could not succeed to show his house on the land for which he is said to have obtained a collusive homestead tenancy purcha. It is alleged that recently the present Anchal Adhikari, i.e., accused No. 1, who has some soft corner for the people of his community at the instance of accused Himayu. Ansari dispossessed the complainant by organising an unlawful assembly with the assistance of his subordinate and men brought by the accused Himayu Ansari with the common object of illegally dismantling the residential house of the complainant and ousting him from his homestead land and he put Himayu Ansari in possession thereof. It is alleged that he requisitioned the services of the police force so that he may keep the complainant under duress and achieve the illegal object of the unlawful assembly. It is further alleged that he along with accused persons made a raid to the house of the complainant on the date of occurrence and ordered the members of the unlawful assembly to dismantle the house of the complainant and to set fire to it. The said accused persons dismantled two living rooms of the complainant and under his order Himayu Ansari set fire to the Gosain Ghar (Pooja Ghar) belonging to the complainant and also looted the house -hold articles belonging to the complainant.

(3.) CONSIDERING the said report, the then CO., Rupauli sought an Aminnapi report which also confirmed that complainant and Tenu Ram had illegally encroached upon the lands of the settlees. Thereafter, the. CO. issued show cause notice to the respondent -complainant to vacate the Government land settled with the settlees and the complainant gave reply to the show cause notice in which he himself admitted that since he has already encroached upon the land and built house thereon, the same may be settled with him. When despite several directions/orders of the local authority the complainant did not remove the encroachment, then on the direction of superior authority, the Circle Officer, who is also accused No. 1 in the complaint on 9.3.1996 asked the petitioner to accompany him along with the police force to remove encroachment from the Government land, which was settled by the State to the settlees.