HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37633 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A for the State- respondent. 2. The instant application has been preferred to quash the chargesheet dated 30.08.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 04.12.2024 along with entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.4789 of 2025 (State vs. Gaya Prasad and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.356 of 2024, under section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Kotwali, District- Shahjahanpur, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Mohammadabad, District Shahjahanpur. 3. Brief facts of the present case are that a first information report dated 31.07.2024 bearing Case Crime No.356 of 2024 was lodged by opposite party no.2/Lekhpal concerned in pursuance to Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against applicants alleging that Gata No.117 area 0.054 hectare, situated at Village Maujampur, Tehsil Sadar, Shahjahanpur, which is recorded as naveen parti (public land), was allotted to accused/applicant no.1, namely, Gaya Prasad and one Suresh in the year 2010-11 for residential purpose on lease. Gaya Prasad sold the said land to applicant nos.2, 3 and 4 without seeking permission to the concerned authorities, thus he breached the condition of lease and caused damage and loss to the public property which is the land vested in Gram Sabha. After lodging of the FIR, the concerned Investigating Officer started inquiry and after conclusion of the same, preferred charge-sheet on dated 30.08.2024 against applicants whereupon learned court concerned has taken cognizance Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Suresh Dhar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Gaya Prasad And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) of offence vide order dated 04.12.2024, which impugned the present application. 4. Learned counsel for applicants has challenged the entire proceedings of the present case as well as impugned chargesheet and cognizance/summoning order on several other grounds inter-alia precisely on the ground that lodging of the first information report taking aid of provisions of the P.D.P.P. Act, 1984 is nothing but an abuse of process of the law, inasmuch as, the said provisions cannot be invoked to lodge a criminal case on the allegations of damage or loss caused to the Gram Sabha land. The Magistrate has acted illegally and without application of judicial mind in taking cognizance on the charge sheet submitted under Section 2/3 of the P.D.P.P. Act, 1984. 5. In any case, the question as to whether applicants had illegally encroached upon the land vested in Gram Sabha, recorded as public property, can only be adjudicated by the Revenue Authorities. The proper proceeding for eviction of the unauthorized occupant can be undertaken under Section 67 of the Revenue Code, 2006. The short-cut procedure adopted by opposite party no.2, is nothing but with a view to harass the applicants. 6. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application, but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments raised by learned counsel for applicants. 7. While dealing with similar issue, co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order 6.8.2020 passed in Application u/s 482 no. 9964 of 2020 (Munshi Lal and Another vs. State of U.P. and another), quashed the entire proceeding u/s 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and held that as far as criminal proceeding for illegal encroachment, damage or trespass over the land belonging to Gram Sabha is concerned, the same can be undertaken but it would be subject to the adjudication of rights of the parties over the land in dispute as the said determination can be done only by the revenue court. As far as the P.D.P.P. Act, 1984 is concerned, the same has been enacted with the specific purpose. The statement of objects and reasons of the said Act shows that it was enacted with a view to curb acts of vandalism and damage to public property including destruction and damage caused during riots and public commotion. 8. From perusal of the records, it transpires that present case is squarely NA528 No. 37633 of 2025 2 covered with the judgment of co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Munshi Lal (supra) and as such the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants pursuant to Section of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, cannot but be said to be an abuse of the process of law or the Court. The cognizance/summoning order dated 04.12.2024 has been passed in complete ignorance of law. The continuation of criminal proceedings, in the considered opinion of the Court, being an abuse of process of the Court, ends of the justice requires that the said proceedings be quashed. 9. Invoking inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, chargesheet dated 30.08.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 04.12.2024 along with entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.4789 of 2025 (State vs. Gaya Prasad and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.356 of 2024, under section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Kotwali, District- Shahjahanpur, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Mohammadabad, District Shahjahanpur, are hereby quashed. 10. The instant application stands allowed accordingly. 11. However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the revenue authorities to proceed against applicants, if required, in accordance with the strict provisions of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. September 25, 2025 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 37633 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad