Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

AJAY YADAVversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court held that the allegations were mala‑fide and the prosecution an abuse of process, thereby quashing the order of cognizance.

Summary

Petitioners Kundan Kumar and others sought to quash a July 1, 2019 order of cognizance taken by a Judicial Magistrate under several IPC sections and the Arms Act in a land‑dispute case. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners threatened and assaulted Sanju Devi with weapons and that Kundan Kumar fired at her. Petitioners contended that the dispute was civil, the sale deed was in their name, and the FIR was a colourable criminal case. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, they argued the prosecution was mala‑fide and an abuse of process. The High Court examined the material, found the allegations to be mala‑fide, and consequently quashed the order of cognizance and all related proceedings.

Issues considered

  • Whether the prosecution in the land‑dispute case is mala‑fide and constitutes an abuse of process
  • Whether the order of cognizance dated 01‑07‑2019 should be set aside and quashed
  • Whether a civil dispute can be treated as a criminal case under the cited provisions

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • mala fide prosecution
  • abuse of process
  • quash order
  • land dispute
  • civil dispute disguised as criminal
  • Indian Penal Code
  • Arms Act
  • high court

Judgment

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54625 of 2019
            Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2019 Thana- PIPRA District- Patna
     ======================================================
     KUNDAN KUMAR Son of Ajay Yadav Resident of Village- Behrawan,
     Police Station- Pipra, District- Patna.

                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                          Versus
1.   THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar
2.   Sanju Devi W/O- Rajundhari Kewat R/O- Behrawanp P.S- Pipra. Dist-
     Patna.

                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
     ======================================================
                                            with
               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 54474 of 2019
            Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2019 Thana- PIPRA District- Patna
     ======================================================
1.    AJAY YADAV Son of Late Vishwanath Roy Resident of Village- Behrawan,
      Police Station- Pipra, District- Patna.
2.   Gulshan Kumar Son of Nawal Kishore Yadav Resident of Village-
     Shekhpura, Police Station- Pipra, District- Patna.
3.   Nitish Kumar Son of Vijay Singh Resident of Village- Pipra, Police Station-
     Ram Krishna Nagar, District- Patna.
4.   Tinku Kumar Son of Umesh Prasad Resident of Village- Pipra, Police
     Station- Ram Krishna Nagar, District- Patna.
5.   Ravi Ranjan Kumar Son of Sachchida Prasad Resident of Village- Sati
     Asthan Masaurhi, Police Station- Masaurhi, District- Patna.
6.   Pyare Arun Yadav @ prare yadav Son of Arun Yadav Resident of Village-
     Paschim Sarira, Police Station- Manjhanpur, District- Kokshamvi (U.P.)

                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                          Versus
1.   THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar
2.   Sanju Devi W/o Rajandhari Kewat, R/o Village-Behrawan, P.S.-Pipra,
     District-Patna

                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 54625 of 2019)
     For the Petitioner/s     : Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, Advocate
     For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhayaya, APP
     (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 54474 of 2019)
     For the Petitioner/s     : Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, Advocate
     For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP
         Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54625 of 2019(4) dt.20-01-2026
                                                     2/4




                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   20-01-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. This application has been filed on behalf of the

                   petitioners for setting aside/quashing the order of cognizance

                   dated 01.07.2019 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist

                   Class, Masaurhi took cognizance under Sections 147, 148, 149,

                   323, 341, 307, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of

                   the Arms Act against the petitioners in connection with Pipra

                   P.S. Case No. 32/2019.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, petitioners threatened

                   Sanju Devi with weapons over a land dispute, assaulted her

                   causing injuries and Ajay Yadav’s son Kundan Kumar fired at

                   her. When villagers arrived, the accused fled. Police

                   apprehended others while Ajay Yadav (petitioner no. 1) escaped.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   from the reading of the FIR, it appears that a civil dispute has

                   been given a colour of criminal case and the sale deed is in the

                   name of the petitioner.

                                5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has relied

                   upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in the

                   case of State of Haryana & Ors v. Bhajan Lal & Ors, 1992
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54625 of 2019(4) dt.20-01-2026
                                            3/4




          Supp (1) SCC 335 and has submitted that the present

          prosecution is a mala-fide one and the same is nothing but an

          abuse of the process of the court.

                       6. Per-contra, the learned APP for the State has

          opposed the application of the petitioners.

                       7 . The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhajan

          Lal (Supra) has held that mala – fide prosecution should not be

          allowed to continue.

                       8. On careful examination of the materials available

          on record, this Court finds that the allegations against the

          petitioners are mala-fide and the complaint has been filed by the

          complainant against the petitioners in order to falsely implicate

          them in a concocted case.

                       9 . Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme

          Court in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra) , the application stands

          allowed.

                       10 . Accordingly, the cognizance dated 01.07.2019

          passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Masaurhi in

          Pipra P.S. Case No. 32/2019 and all the consequential

          proceedings arising out of the aforesaid case are hereby

          quashed.
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54625 of 2019(4) dt.20-01-2026
                                                          4/4




                                     11 . Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand

                        disposed of.



                                                   (Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.