AMBIKA PRASAD SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under section 482 Cr. P.C. has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing the entire criminal proceedings in G.R. No. 456/93 (Tr. No. 669/93) arising out of Jakkanpur P.S. case no. 8 of 1993 including the order taking cognizance by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, under sections 341 and 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears from the contents of the petition that parties are fighting for a long time over a so called passage within the purchased land of the petitioner. The contents of the petition remain uncontroverted as the opposite party neither appeared nor filed any counter affidavit.

(2.) THE petitioner no.1 Ambika Prasad Sinha purchased a piece of land measuring two Kathas and odd for construction of a house in the town of Patna. The informant Rama Nand Rai also purchased a piece of land in the name of his wife just contiguous south of the land of petitioner no.1. From the very date of purchase the informant O.P. No.2 wanted to have a passage through the petitioner 'sland by breaking his existing wall by force but the petitioners had resisted. Then at the instance of the informant on 24.8.69 a proceeding was initiated under section 144 Cr. P.C. The petitioner no.1 appeared and filed objection and on consideration of the cases of the parties the said proceeding u/s. 144 Cr. P.C. was converted into a proceeding under section 147 Cr. P.C. and after hearing both the parties it was decided against the informant O.P. no.2 holding that as an alternative passage was there no right of the informant existed for having a passage through the land of petitioner no.1 and as such a prohibitory order was passed against the informant -O.P. no.2. It is stated that a revision was also preferred against the said order but the same had also been dismissed. Although the prohibitory order was there, according to the petitioner the informant went on creating trouble and as such a criminal case was lodged by the petitioner also and the same is now pending before the Sessions Court being S. T. No. 293/82.

(3.) IN the present case also the informant had alleged in his first information report that while he was making repairs in the so called passage the petitioners had created obstructions and also assault was made for causing simple hurt on the persons of the informant and his men. After investigation charge sheet was submitted under sections 341, 323/34 I.P.C and cognizance was taken on the basis of the charge sheet without any application of mind as stated in the petition. In the first information report no date has been mentioned as to when and at what time the alleged occurrence took place. The same was vague one. When there was an order of permanent injunction by the civil court and earlier to that there was prohibitory order under section 147 Cr. P.C. against the informant, there is no question for the informant going to the passage for repairing work and the very basis and the foundation of the criminal case is a myth. In that way the criminal case is nothing but an abuse of the process of the court and hence the whole of the criminal proceeding is hereby quashed including the order of cognizance. Raj Kumar Ram Versus State Of Bihar