Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111590 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21196 of 2025 Applicant :- Yaman Solanki Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhinav Gaur,Ankit Shukla,Mohd. Rashid Siddiqui,Nitin Jaiswal,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Vibhu Rai, learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for State. 2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to set aside the summoning order dated 22.07.2024 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 2, Bareilly in relation to Case Crime no. 107/2024 under Section 2/3 Damages to Public Property Act, 1984 lodged at PS- Prem Nagar, District Bareilly as well as charge-sheet dated 23.05.2024 in aforesaid case crime number. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that present FIR has been lodged by opposite party no. 2/Junior Engineer, Water Department, Nagar Nigam, District Bareilly alleging therein that Public Works Department has got the road constructed between Dharam Kaata and Tebri Nath and the Firm conducting the work has damaged and dumped its waste in the sewer manhole chamber and due to said act, sewer manhole chamber has been choked and overflowed which has caused inconvenience to the public of adjacent area. Applicant has not been named in the FIR. His name surfaced in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded by first informant.After conclusion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant whereupon cognizance has been taken up vide order dated 22.07.2024 which has been challenged through instant application. 4. It is admitted on behalf of applicant that the said work of construction of road between Dharam Kaata and Tebri Nath has been allotted to the Firm of applicant namely M/s Riddhi Infrastructure. However, the said work has been was completed by Firm of applicant on dated 17.08.2024 and on dated 20.05.2025 a "Work Experience Certificate" has been issued by the Public Works Department which shows that work of M/s Riddhi Infrastructure has been found to be satisfactory. It shows that applicant has completed its work as per the terms and conditions laid down by the Public Works Department and there was no complaint in respect of any damage being caused to any public property whatsoever. The Investigating Officer has failed to bring on record any evidence to even remotely suggest as to whether any damage to the sewer manhole chamber has been caused either by the Firm of the applicant. Even if, the version of prosecution is believed to be true, though not admitted, the applicant cannot be vicariously held liable for the action of his labours or other employees involved in the construction of the road. 5. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application. 6. After hearing the rival submissions extended by learned counsels for the parties and perusing records, it is crystal clear that the matter relates to two different agencies who are involved in the public work and if any damage caused to the work conducted by any of the respective authority/agency, the same is not amenable for institution of the FIR at the behest of Nagar Nigam, District Bareilly since the work conducting authority is in shape of two agencies allocated by Public Works Department and after completion of work the same agency has got the work experience certificate issued by the Public Works Department and the applicant is the proprietor of M/s Riddhi Infrastructure who completed the work of construction of road between Tebri Nath to Dharam Kaata at District Bareilly. If any damage is caused to the Water Department, Nagar Nigam, District Bareilly, the same may be amicably solved with the higher authorities of the Public Works Department rather to institute criminal proceeding against proprietor of the firm who has been authorisied by Public Works Department for completion of work in shape of construction of road. 7. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances, entire proceeding instituted and proceeded in pursuance to Case Crime no. 107/2024 under Section 2/3 Damages to Public Property Act, 1984 lodged at PS- Prem Nagar, District Bareilly is a malicious one and the same cannot be permitted to drag applicant into unwarranted criminal litigation who is having no criminal history credited against him which is apparent from the instructions sought by learned Additional Government Advocate as such,charge sheet dated 23.05.2024, cognizance order dated 22.07.2024 along with entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime no. 107/2024 under Section 2/3 Damages to Public Property Act, 1984 lodged at PS- Prem Nagar, District Bareilly are hereby set aside only in respect of applicant herein. 8. The application u/s 528 BNSS stands allowed accordingly. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad