IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.52212 of 2007 1. VISHWANATH PADIT, S/o Late Paras Padit. 2. Lalmati Devi, W/o Vishwanath Padit. Both are resident of Village-Bargajwa Vishunpurwa, P.S.-Shikarpur, District-West Champaran. …….Accused/Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. Renu Devi, W/o Ashok Prasad. Resident of Ward No. 12, Narkatiaganj, P.S.-Shikarpur, District-West Champaran. …….Informant/Opposite Parties. ----------- 4. 19.03.2010 Heard the parties. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 20.09.2007 by which the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bettiah, West Champaran in Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 267 of 2006 dated 07.10.2006 has refused to discharge the petitioners under Sections 420, 468 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the Opposite Party is that the petitioners were allegedly tenants in her house and after making good friends with her husband they stopped giving rent and when asked to vacate the house they also threatened her. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet for offences under Section 420, 468 and 504 of the Indian Penal - 2 - Code and thereafter cognizance has been taken and the trial proceeded. The Opposite Party No. 2 has appeared in the present application and there is no doubt that in fact there was a dispute between the parties over tenancy/owner-ship of the said house. It transpired during investigation that the husband of the Opposite Party No. 2 was in the habit of liquor and in state of intoxication had executed a sale deed with regard to the house in question on account of which subsequently a dispute arose between the parties as to who was the real owner and who the trespasser. For this reason a proceeding under Sections 144 and 107 Cr.P.C. was also initiated between the parties on the police report. From perusal of the First Information Report, I find that there is totally absence of any ingredients of criminal case much less under Sections 420, 468 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears that the actions of the husband of the Opposite Party No. 2 has created a situation in which the Opposite Party No. 2 has filed the present case having been deprived of the rights of enjoyment of the property which in - 3 - her understanding belong to her. A Criminal Court is totally ill-equipped to go into the details of the owner-ship of the house in dispute and in my view the continuance of the proceeding is a gross abuse of the process of the Court. For the reasons stated above, this application is allowed and the order dated 20.09.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bettiah, West Champaran in Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 267 of 2006 is quashed. Vikash/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)