ORDER M. Y. Eqbal, J. By this application under section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioners have prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with G.Case no.212 of 2005 instituted against the petitioners for the offence under section 33,66(a) and 63 of the Indian Forest Act pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh. 2. Petitioners' case is that the aforesaid G. Case No.212/2005 was instituted on the basis of offence report submitted by one Forest Guard of Bargaon Forest alleging inter alia that on 3.5.2005 he received secret confidential information to the effect that several Trucks have entered inside the forest area. When they entered inside the forest area, then they heard the sound of several persons and saw that about 150 to 200 people were indulged in illegal mining and they were loading the coal over the same trucks. According to the petitioner, he happens to be the owner of one of the trucks alleged to have been involved in the commission of the offence. Petitioner contended that although offence report was sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate and the same was received on 4.5.2005 but till 3.11.2008 no prosecution report was filed by the prosecution, so that the Court may take cognizance of the offence. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the maximum punishment for the alleged offence is 2 years and therefore, if prosecution report is filed in the Court after 3 1/2 years that would be barred under section 468 Cr.P.C. and the continuance of offence will be the abuse of process of Court. 3. Petitioners' own case is that the offence was allegedly committed on 3.5.2005 and a complaint was sent to Chief Judicial Magistrate on 4.5.2005. A copy of the said complaint sent by the Forest Officer, Chainpur, Kuju, Ranchi to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh has been annexed as Annexure-1 to this application. 3. Petitioners' own case is that the offence was allegedly committed on 3.5.2005 and a complaint was sent to Chief Judicial Magistrate on 4.5.2005. A copy of the said complaint sent by the Forest Officer, Chainpur, Kuju, Ranchi to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh has been annexed as Annexure-1 to this application. The said complaint reads as under: - ^^lsok esa] eq[; U;kf;d n.Mkf/kdkjh] gtkjhckxA fo’k;%& vijk/k izfrosnu laŒ 2443 fnŒ 3-5-05 lefiZr djus ds laca/k esaA egk”k;] lfou; fuosnu iwoZd lwfpr djuk gS fd fnukad 3-5-2005 dks yxHkx 3 cts izkr%dky Jh ve`r lko] ouj{kh] fo”oLr lwpuk ds vk/kkj ij fljdk ,oa cnxkao ou Hkze.k vius lg;ksxh ds lkFk djus ds Øe esa lwpuk feyh fd dbZ Vªd taxy {ks= esa ?kqlh gqbZ gSA ouj{kh ou lhek ds vanj ?kqls rks ik;s fd 50 ls 200 ds djhc etnwj dks;yk mR[kuu esa yx dj LVkVZ Vªdksa ij dks;yk ykn jgs gSaA ouj{khx.k dks viuh rjQ vkrs ns[kdj vfHk;qDr oujf{k;ksa ds lkFk >xM+k djus ij mrk: gks x;s rFkk xkyh xykSt nsus yxsA la[;k vf/kd gksus ds dkj.k ouj{kh vfHk;qDrksa dks fxjrkj djus esa vlQy jgsA rqjar bl Øe esa ekSdk ikdj ouj{kh }kjk VkpZ dh jks”kuh esa Vªd uaŒ uksV fd;k x;k rRi”pkr~ luj{kh }kjk ,d vijk/k izfrosnu la[;k 2443 fnŒ 3-5-05 lefiZr fd;k x;kA vijk/kh dk mDr d`R; Hkkjrh; ou ¼fcgkj la”kks/ku 1989½ vf/kfu;e 1927] dh /kkjk,¡ 33] 63] 66 A ,oa ou laj{k.k vf/kfu;e] 1980 dh lqlaxr /kkjkvksa dk mYya?ku gSA vr% Jheku ls vkxzg gS fd vijk/kh ij dM+h ls dM+h dkuwuh dkjZokbZ fd;k tk;A iw.kZ tk¡pksijkar tk¡p izfrosnu mfpr ek/;e ls lefiZr fd;k tk;sxkA vkidk fo”oklh] g@& 4-05-05 ou ifjlj vf/kdkjh] pSuiqj] dwuq] jk¡phA** 4. On the basis of the said report, a case was instituted and registered on 4.5.2005 being G. Case No. 212 of 2005. After the institution and registration, the case was time to time adjourned for submission of prosecution report. In the aforesaid premises, in my considered opinion, merely because of non-submission of prosecution report, continuance of the proceeding cannot be held to be barred under Section 468 Cr.P.C. 5. As noticed above, although the case was instituted on the basis of complaint as far back as on 4.5.2005 and since then, the proceeding is continuing for the submission of prosecution report by the complainant. As noticed above, although the case was instituted on the basis of complaint as far back as on 4.5.2005 and since then, the proceeding is continuing for the submission of prosecution report by the complainant. Even in five years, the complainant has not been able to file prosecution report and because of that, the petitioners have been harassed for the last five years. On this ground, in my view, such proceeding may not continue as continuance of such proceeding shall be the abuse of process of law. 6. For the reasons aforesaid, this application is allowed and the entire criminal proceeding is quashed.