IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.21473 OF 2004 SHIV KUMAR SAHNI, SON OF LATE THAKKO SAHANI, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA BAKARGANJ, POST OFFICE AND POLICE STATION LAHERIASARAI, DISTRICT DARBHANGA ……………………………………………………PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RISHIKESH KASHYAP, PRESIDENT, DARBHANGA MATSYAJIVI SWABLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED, SON OF JIWWACH SAHNI, RESIDENT OF SHIVAJI NAGAR, POLICE STATION TOWN, DISTRICT DARBHANGA ……………………………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES ******** FOR THE PETITIONER :- MR. KESHAV SRIVASTAVA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR THE S T A T E :- MR. J. K. SINGH NO. 1, A.P.P. FOR O.P. NO. 2 :- NONE ************ 16 24/02/2011 This application has been filed against the order dated 06.09.2003 passed in Sadar Police Station Case No. 127 of 2003 by which the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga has taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 379 & 384 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the informant is that the District Fisheries Officer had settled certain Pokhars in favour of the Darbhanga Matsyajivi Swablambi Sahkari Samiti Limited for the period 01.04.2003 to 31.03.2006. It is alleged in the First Information Report that the petitioner who is the President of Bakarganj Matsyajivi Swablambi Sahkari Samiti Limited, managed to obtain a parwana in contravention of the Government regulations and was 2 fishing in the Pokhars settled with the informant-Society. The case of the petitioner, on the other hand, is that the petitioner was settled all the Pokhars of Darbhanga vide a parwana issued for the period 01.04.2003 to 31.03.2005. The Opposite Party No. 2 in violation of the settlement order was found fishing in the Pokhars of the petitioner, for which he had filed a complaint petition. It is also stated by the petitioner that his settlement was cancelled for which he moved the Writ Court vide CWJC No. 4195 of 2003. The informant was respondent no. 7 in that writ application. This Court stayed the cancellation of settlement by order dated 23.05.2003. It is after the order of this Court dated 23.05.2003 that the petitioner and the members of his Society were fishing at the Barki Pokhar when the First Information Report was lodged. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that technically speaking after the order of stay of cancellation of the petitioner’s settlement, he became legally entitled to fish in the Pokhars, whereas the claim of the Opposite Party No. 2 is that since his settlement was not cancelled, he too had a legal right in the Pokhars concerned, and therefore, the act of the petitioner and the members of his Society amounted to committing theft. 3 It is apparent from the facts aforesaid that both the parties by virtue of their settlement were claiming possession over the Pokhars in question. The orders of the administrative authorities have led to this confusion and discord between the two Societies. It cannot be said that either of the Societies was in the wrong since both by virtue of administrative order were fishing in the Pokhars concerned. In the circumstances, I find that no offence is made out under Sections 379 & 384 of the Indian Penal Code. This application is allowed and the order dated 06.09.2003 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in Sadar Police Station Case No. 127 of 2003 is hereby quashed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )