Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2010
  6. /
  7. January

Sukh Dayal And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|04 January, 2010

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the proceedings of Case No. 2975 of 2009, arising out of Case Crime No. 244 of 2008, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Hastinapur, District Meerut, pending before learned Judicial Magistrate-I, District Meerut.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are bonafide purchaser of the plot in question over which they had constructed the house and house tax and water tax are being regularly deposited by the applicants. It is further contended that when the neighbour of the applicants tried to raise unauthorise wall, the applicants filed Civil Suit No. 665 of 2002 before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), District Meerut wherein, interim injunction was granted to the applicants on 24.05.2002, copy of which, is annexed as Annexure-3 to this petition. The said suit is stil pending. It is further argued that the opposite party no.2 has lodged F.I.R. stating that he has been in possession of the plot in question since 1978 and the applicants have forcibly taken the possession of the same and therefore, it is reported and the possession may be delivered to him and action be taken against the applicants which was challenged by the applicants by way of filing Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 19573 of 2008, in which another Bench of this Court had granted interim order on 05.11.2008, copy of which, is annexed as Annexure-8 to the petition. It is next contended that without considering the fact that the matter is purely of civil nature, in which civil proceedings are pending, charge sheet has been submitted which is nothing but gross misuse of the process of Court. Learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon a Judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2008 (1) JIC 737 (SC) Indra Mohan Goswami and others Vs. State of Uttranchal in support of his contention.
Issue notice to opposite party no.2 returnable within a period of four weeks. Steps be taken within a week.
Learned A.G.A. prays for and is granted four weeks time for filing counter affidavit. Opposite party no.2 may also file counter affidavit within the same period. As prayed by learned counsel for the applicants, two weeks thereafter is granted for filing rejoinder affidavit.
List immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period.Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
Order Date :- 4.1.2010 S.Ali
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sukh Dayal And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
04 January, 2010