IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.903 of 2008 1. TEJ NARAYAN YADAV, SON OF MAHAVEER YADAV 2. RAM NARAYAN YADAV @ DEVENDER YADAV, SON OF LATE KANTEER YADAV 3. DEO NARAYAN YADAV, SON OF LATE DUKHAN YADAV 4. RAMASHRAY YADAV, SON OF DEO NARAYAN YADAV ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KALYANPUR, P.S. BAHERA, DISTRICT DARBHANGA. --- PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. LEELA DEVI, WIFE OF SAUDAR MUKHIA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KALYANPUR, P.S. BAHERA, DISTRICT DARBHANGA. --- OPPOSITE PARTIES For the petitioners :- Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, Advocate For the informant :- Mr. Md. Shahnawaz Ali, Advocate For opposite party :- Ms. Jahan Ara, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P. ----------- 4 9.4.2010 Heard the parties. Deo Narayan Yadav is the owner of Khata No. 1021, Khesra No. 444. The informant and the family members are trying to encroach upon the said land and as such they had filed the present case alleging that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 have assaulted the complainant and her husband and have alleged that the lady is a witch. It is submitted that the accused persons are misusing the provisions of the Witch Craft Act and are trying to terrorize the petitioners because they want to some how take possession of he lands in question. In this context the petitioners submit that they have filed a case against the informant’s husband which is Bahera P.S. Case No. 188 of 2007 on 20.6.2007. The present case has been filed on 28.6.2007 just eight days after filing of the earlier case. In the First Information Report instituted on behalf of petitioner no. 1, it has been specifically stated that Kamal Mukhiya was witness in the case. Srikant Mukhiya, Binda Mukhiya, Saudagar Mukhiya husband of the complainant, Ram Udgar Mukhiya and five or six other persons entered into the field of 2 petitioner no. 1 and assaulted the informant. The fact that the complainant’s husband was trying to interfere with the petitioners’ possession is also indicated in the First Information Report wherein it has been stated that the petitioners had approached the Circle Officer to get their lands measured and demarcated for which notice had been filed. The opposite party i.e. the husband of the complainant and his associates were creating problem with respect to measurement of the lands of the petitioners. Annexure-3 is the sale deed which indicates that the land belongs to the petitioners. In this background, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present case has been instituted on behest of the husband of the complainant Saudagar Mukhiya accused in the case filed on 20.6.2007. The present case has been instituted just eight days the institution of the First Information Report in which Saudagar Mukhiya and others were made accused. I find that this is an example of a malicious prosecution and a gross abuse of the process of law in order to encroach upon the petitioners’ land which is the subject matter of the actual dispute. In the circumstances, I quash the order dated 11.10.2007, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Benipur in C.R. No. 198 of 2007 taking cognizance under Sections 323, 380 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code and 3,4 of the Witch Craft Act. This application is allowed. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)