IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.3559 of 2001

===========================================================

1. Rukmini Devi, widow of late Nagendra Prasad

2. Binod Kumar, son of late Nagendra Prasad Both resident of Mohalla Chakarpan Tola, P.s.
Mokama, Distt. Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus

1. Dharnikant Issar, son of Sri Umakant Issar, resident of village Kokaila, P.S. Dalsingh Sarai,
Distt. Samastipur, at present M.O. Flat No. 1, P.M.C.H. Campus, Patna.

2. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s

=========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Upendra Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Adv.

For the State : Mr. P.K. Sahi, A.P.P.

Mr. Mukesh Kr.Thakur

=========================================================== CORAM:
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-06-2013
Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the State.

2. The Petitioners seek quashing of the entire proceeding including the order dated 13.10.1999
passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna City, in G.R. No. 1085 of 1995, T.R. No. 513
of 1999 by which he has taken cognizance and summoned the Petitioners under Sections
467, 468, 471, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The case of the Complainant is that he had purchased a certain piece of land from Sheo Nagar
Co-operative Housing Construction Society, Bahadurpur, and a sale deed was executed in his
favour on 26.9.1984 as also the land was mutated in Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3559 of 2001
dt.25-06-2013 his name. He then put a pillar and boundary wall on the said land. Subsequently,
the occupant of the adjoining Plot informed him that somebody else was putting a boundary wall
on his land. He then enquired in to the matter and found out that the Petitioners claimed to be
purchasers of the land through a false sale deed allegedly executed by him.

4. The Complaint was sent under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. for investigation. After due
investigation, the Police submitted Final Report in the matter on 31.10.1996. The Court did not
pass any order upon the same. Subsequently, the Complainant filed a protest petition and the
Court examined him as the witnesses and took cognizance in the matter.

5. It appears that for the same cause of action Title Suit No. 84 of 1997 has been filed on
6.8.1997. The Petitioners are Defendants No. 1 and 2 in the said Suit and had appeared and filed
written statement that they are bonafide purchasers and have Title over the land. The sale deed
originally executed by the Co-operative Society in favour of the Opposite Party No. 1 was also in
their possession, they submitted.

6. It appears that for the same cause of action which dispute is primarily civil in nature, a Title
Suit is pending between the parties and, hence, the present proceeding would be superfluous and
a Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.3559 of 2001 dt.25-06-2013 gross abuse of the process of the
Court.

7. Hence, the application is allowed and the entire proceeding including the order dated
13.10.1999 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna City, in G.R. No. 1085 of 1995,
T.R. No. 513 of 1999, is hereby quashed.

8. However, quashment of the present proceeding shall have no bearing of any civil litigation
pending between the parties.

(Anjana Prakash, J) Patna High Court, Patna.

Dated, the 25th June,2013 NAFR/S.Ali