Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:64258 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7853 of 2025 Applicant :- Arvind And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Srivastava,Ch. Dil Nisar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A for the State-respondent. 2. By means of the present application, applicant has sought quashing the entire criminal proceeding of Case no. 3430 of 2022 (State vs. Arvind and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 266 of 2022, u/s 3/4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, PS- Deoband, District Saharanpur, pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M. Deoband, Saharanpur as well as impugned charge sheet dated 23.06.2022 along with cognizance & summoning order dated 23.12.2022 passed by learned A.C.J.M, Deoband, Saharanpur. 3. Brief facts of the present case are that a first information report dated 05.05.2022 bearing Case Crime No.266 of 2022 was lodged by opposite party no.2 in pursuance of Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against applicants alleging that khasra no. 290 & 291 situated at village Ransura is a 'Chak marg' and state land, whereupon the applicants who are the agriculturist of chak no. 299 & 295 were illegally mining. The applicants had, thus, caused damage and loss to the public property which is the Government property. After lodging of the FIR, the concerned Investigating Officer started inquiry and after conclusion of the same, preferred charge-sheet on dated 23.06.2022 against applicants whereupon learned court concerned has taken cognizance/summoning of offence vide order dated 23.12.2022 which impugned the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for applicants has challenged the charge sheet 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 village land. The Magistrate has acted illegally and without application of judicial mind in taking cognizance on the charge sheet submitted under Section 3/4 of the P.D.P.P. Act, 1984. 5. In any case, the question as to whether applicants had illegally caused mining over the village land, 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 opposite party no. 2 nothing but with a view to harass the applicant. 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 applicant. 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 3/4 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 23.12.2022 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 of the High Court, entire proceedings of the Case Crime no. 266 of 2022, u/s 3/4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, PS- Deoband, District Saharanpur is hereby quashed only in respect of applicants herein. 10. The instant application stands allowed. Order Date :- 24.4.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad