Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119057 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25773 of 2025 Applicant :- Mahendra Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhanshu Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Sudhanshu Singh, learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A for the State-respondent. 2. By means of the present application, applicant has sought quashing of impugned cognizance order dated 16.05.2025 arising out of charge-sheet dated 16.12.2024 in Case Crime no. 891 of 2024 under Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case no. 6306 of 2025 under Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, PS- Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly pending in court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Bareilly. 3. Brief facts of the present case are that a first information report dated 04.12.2024 bearing Case Crime No.891 of 2024 was lodged by Lekhpal/opposite party no.2 in pursuance of Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against applicants alleging that applicants have encroached illegally over some part of Gata No.277 which is Naveen Parti land. The applicant 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 16.12.2024 against applicant whereupon learned court concerned has taken cognizance/summoning of offence vide order dated 16.05.2025 which impugned the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for applicant has 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. However, learned counsel for applicants submitted that after lodging of FIR applicants have already removed the alleged encroachment in presence of Gram Pradhan and this fact has been ascertained by the opposite party no. 2 in his report which is appended at page no. 41 of the instant application. 5. 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 applicants. 6. 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. 7. 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 2/3 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. Moreover, from perusal of report of opposite party no. 2/concerned Lekhpal it is clear that alleged encroachment narrated in FIR has already been removed by the applicants and as such continuance of present proceeding against applicants will amount to abuse of process of law. The cognizance/summoning order dated 16.05.2025 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. 8. Invoking inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS of the High Court, entire proceedings of the Criminal Case no. 6306 of 2025 under Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, PS- Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly is hereby quashed only in respect of applicants namely Mahendra Singh, Madanlal and Bhoopram. 9. The instant application stands allowed. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad