HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34580 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. Present application has been preferred to quash the impugned charge- sheet dated 25.03.2025, summoning/cognizance order dated 08.05.2025 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly and the entire proceedings of Case No. 5768 of 2025 (State vs. Irfan and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0057 of 2025, under section 329(3) BNS and Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station-Meerganj, District- Bareilly pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly as well as to stay the further proceedings of abovementioned case. 3. On similar set of facts, the proceedings under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has already been initiated against the applicants and the same has been culminated into order dated 18.11.2024 through which it has been determined by the competent revenue authority in shape of tehsildar that there is hardly any illegal encroachment has been carried out by the applicants and as such, notice in respect of plot no. 1838 situated by Village-Sidhauli, Pargana-Ajau, Tehsil-Meerganj, District-Bareilly has already been withdrawn. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that on similar set of facts in respect of plot no. 1838, they have been implicated in case crime no. 57 of 2025, which is in shape of unwarranted criminal litigation, since the same has already been adjudicated in pursuance to proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, wherein the specific finding Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anand Mohan Pandey, Ram Raj Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Abdul Hakeem And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) has been recorded by the competent revenue authority that there is hardly any encroachment carried out by the applicants over plot no. 1838, which has been entered in revenue records as manure pit. 5. Learned A.G.A., has although vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application, but did not dispute the fact that proceeding under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 has already been instituted and the same has been culminated in favour of the applicants. 6. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances, once the specific proceedings provided under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, wherein the allegation whatsoever has been put-forward against the applicants, in shape of narration of FIR, has already been examined in shape of contesting the matter from both the parties by way of providing opportunity for filing objection and reply to the notice issued under Section 67(1) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and the same has been culminated into order dated 18.11.2024 through which it is crystal clear that there is hardly any encroachment carried out by the applicants over manure pit, as mentioned in the FIR, conduction of the inquiry as well as cognizance thereupon, is highly illegal. 7. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances, impugned charge- sheet dated 25.03.2025, summoning/cognizance order dated 08.05.2025 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly and the entire proceedings of Case No. 5768 of 2025 (State vs. Irfan and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0057 of 2025, under section 329(3) BNS and Section 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station-Meerganj, District- Bareilly pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly, are hereby set-aside in respect of applicants herein. 8. The instant application stands allowed accordingly. September 10, 2025 #Vik/- NA528 No. 34580 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad