HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36893 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. The instant application has been preferred to quash the charge-sheet dated 31.03.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 24.10.2024 and the entire proceeding of Case No.89996 of 2024 (State vs. Sita Devi and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.354 of 2023, under sections 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Phoolpur, District- Varanasi, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.4, Varanasi. 3. Brief facts of the present case are that a first information report dated 21.10.2023 bearing Case Crime No.354 of 2023 was lodged by opposite party no.2 in pursuance to sections 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 against applicants along with other accused with an allegation that they are having illegal possession over the land being Arazi no.173ka, area 1.109 hectare, which is recorded as Banjar land. The applicants 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 31.03.2024 against applicants along with other accused, whereupon learned court concerned has taken cognizance of offence vide order dated 24.10.2024, which impugned the present application. 4. Learned counsel for applicants has challenged the charge-sheet as well as cognizance/summoning order on several other grounds inter-alia precisely Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Abdul Rajjak And 4 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. The Magistrate has acted illegally and without application of judicial mind in taking cognizance on the charge sheet submitted under Sections 2/3 of the P.D.P.P. Act, 1984. 5. In any case, the question as to whether applicants had illegally encroached upon the land vested in Gram Sabha, recorded as public property/banjar 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 Lekhpal of the village concerned is nothing but with a view to harass the applicants. 6. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant application, but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments raised by learned counsel for applicants. 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 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, cannot but be said to be an abuse of the process of law NA528 No. 36893 of 2025 2 or the Court. The cognizance/summoning order dated 24.10.2024 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, charge-sheet dated 31.03.2024, cognizance/summoning order dated 24.10.2024 and the entire proceeding of Case No.89996 of 2024 (State vs. Sita Devi and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.354 of 2023, under sections 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Phoolpur, District- Varanasi, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.4, Varanasi, are hereby quashed only in respect of applicants herein. 10. The instant application stands allowed accordingly. September 23, 2025 Saif NA528 No. 36893 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad