OM PRAKASH DAVE Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C., the petitioner seeks to quash the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur dated 15.12.2001 taking cognizance against him for offence under Sec. 380, 454 and 427 I.RC.

(2.) It appears that the second respondent who is real brother of the petitioner filed a complaint in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur stating inter alia that a civil suit with respect to their ancestral house is pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1, Jodhpur. In the said suit, interim injunction was granted by order dated 28.2.1998. As per the Commissioners report, the complainant was in the possession of the house, it 1 is alleged that on 14.10.2001 when he visited the house, he found that certain articles were missing. He suspected that theft has been committed by the accused petitioner. The complaint was sent to the police for investigation under Sec. 156(3) Cr.RC. The police registered the offence under Sec. 380, 454 and 427 I.RC. The police in its reports dated 7.11.2001, 28.8.2001 and 1 9.12.2001 has mentioned that no article belonging to the second respondent was lying in the house in dispute. It is also found that keys of the house were with the mother of the accused-petitioner and respondent No. 2. The police also found that neither any theft has been committed nor any breaking has taken place. The police submitted the Final Report. However, on a protest j petition, the statement of complainant was recorded. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner in the manner stated above. The order has been confirmed in revision by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.

(3.) I have carefully gone through the entire record. Even according to the : complainant, the house in dispute is an ancestral property. Thus, it is in the ownership and possession of the complainant. The complainant has not given the list of article missing. The matter is pending in the civil court. The parties are trying to settle the dispute by invoking the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. It is clearly a case of abuse of process of court. In order to secure ends of justice, it is considered appropriate to quash the proceedings.