Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106437 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37824 of 2024 Applicant :- Altaf And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Farid Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Farid Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred to quash the entire proceeding including the charge sheet No.361 of 2020 dated 24.7.2020 in Case No.112 of 2022 (State vs. Idrish and others) arising out of Case Crime No.361 of 2020, under Sections 2/3 Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Fatehpur, District Saharanpur, as well as the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 10.7.2023 passed by A.C.J. (J.D.)/J.M. Vth, Saharanpur, pending in the court of A.C.J. (J.D)/J.M. Vth, Saharanpur. 3. Brief facts of the present case are that a first information report dated 01.07.2020 bearing Case Crime No. 361 of 2020 was lodged by Naib Tehsildar, Sadar/opposite party no.2 in pursuance of Section 3/2 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against applicants with the allegation that the farmer of the village Dhankarpur have encroached the Chak-road which was mentioned in the revenue record and the same was freed from them but some farmers including the applicants are not leaving illegal encroachment from the chak-road due to which public property has been damaged. The applicants had, thus, 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 24.07.2020 against applicants whereupon learned court concerned has taken cognizance of offence vide order dated 10.07.2023 which impugned the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for applicants have challenged the chargesheet as well as cognizance/summoning order on several other ground 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 Chakmarg, 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 the Revenue Lekhpal of the village concerned is nothing but with a view to harass the applicants. 6. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant petition but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments raised by learned counsel for applicantd. 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 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 10.7.2023 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 482 Cr.P.C. of the High Court, entire proceeding including the charge sheet No.361 of 2020 dated 24.7.2020 in Case No.112 of 2022 (State vs. Idrish and others) arising out of Case Crime No.361 of 2020, under Sections 2/3 Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Fatehpur, District Saharanpur, as well as the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 10.7.2023 passed by A.C.J. (J.D.)/J.M. Vth, Saharanpur, pending in the court of A.C.J. (J.D)/J.M. Vth, Saharanpur is hereby quashed in respect of applicants. 10. The instant application stands allowed. 11. 10. The instant application stands allowed. 11. However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the revenue authorities concerned to proceed against applicants, if required, in accordance with the strict provisions of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Rakesh Digitally signed by :- RAKESH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad