Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73867 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1772 of 2025 Applicant :- Jaheer Ahmad And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhileshwar Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Akhileshwar Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. 2. This application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 28.11.2023 and summoning/cognizance order dated 04.09.2024 including the entire proceedings of Case No. 27393 of 2024 (State vs. Jahir and Another) arising out of Case Crime No. 510 of 2023, under sections 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 447 of IPC, P.S. Ujhani, District Budaun, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budaun as well as to stay the further proceedings of abovementioned case. 3. No legal argument has been raised by learned counsel for the applicants but at the same time the propriety of justice demands that if any material is available, which is contrary to the law, the same has to be surfaced by the concerned court itself. 4. Implication of the applicants under sections 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 along with Section 447 of IPC which continues to the proceeding which is put under challenge through the instant application, the veracity of the implication of the applicant has to be put under litmus and as such Section 447 available in IPC under Chapter of 'trespass' is dependent upon State amendment carried out under Section 441 IPC, wherein mandatory provision of notice is required but in the instant matter, there is hardly any case made out at the behest of the prosecution that the notice under Section 441 IPC has ever been issued to the applicant and as such implication of the applicant under Section 447 IPC will not be applicable. So far as regarding sections 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, the same shall be dependent upon the specific report submitted by public servant authorized by the competent authority and the word 'competent authority' has been defined under the U.P. Revenue Code for restoration of public property is the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. 5. In the instant matter, the entire proceeding has been carried out by the Executive Officer of Nagar Panchayat, Ujhani, Budaun and as such the authority is not competent to institute the proceeding under Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 without seeking prior approval of the competent authority. 6. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances and in the light of the attraction of mandatory provision which is absent in the prosecution, the entire proceeding pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budaun in shape of Case No. 27393 of 2024 (State vs. Jahir and Another) arising out of Case Crime No. 510 of 2023, under sections 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 447 of IPC, P.S. Ujhani, District Budaun are hereby quashed and set aside. 7. The application stands allowed accordingly. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 #Vik/- Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad