ORDER : By the Court - This application has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of Hazaribagh Sadar (SC/ST) P.S case no.33 of 2009 including the order dated 19.1.2011 whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3(i)(iv)(x)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been taken against the petitioners. 2. It was submitted on behalf of the petitioners that Hira Lal Sethi and Panna Lal Sethi had entered into an agreement with the informant for selling .02 ½ acres and also 7 acres of land which is part of Khas Mahal land. The informant paid part of the consideration money to them. In course of time, both of them, namely, Hira Lal Sethi and Panna Lal Sethi died, as a result of which, the land in question devolved upon the legal heirs of Hira Lal Sethi as Panna Lal Sethi died issueless. The legal heirs of Hira Lal Sethi executed a power of attorney in favour of petitioners no.1 and 2 for looking after the properties and also for pursuing the application filed before the Khas Mahal Officer, Hazaribagh for permission to sell the land, permission was granted. Meanwhile, a case was lodged as Hazaribagh Sadar (SC/ST) P.S case no.33 of 2009 by the opposite party no.2 on the allegation that these petitioners along with labourers came over the land in question and started demolishing the boundary wall and piller erected by her. She was also assaulted and was abused within the public view with the intention to malign and dishonour her. She could be saved only with the intervention of the neighbourers but by the time she was rescued, the accused persons snatched away her gold ornaments. 3. The matter was taken up for investigation. During investigation, the police found the allegation to be false. However, the court on the basis of materials available in the case diary took cognizance of the offence, vide order dated 19.1.2011 which is under challenge. 4. 3. The matter was taken up for investigation. During investigation, the police found the allegation to be false. However, the court on the basis of materials available in the case diary took cognizance of the offence, vide order dated 19.1.2011 which is under challenge. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that on the same and similar allegation, one complaint case bearing Complaint Case No.1649 of 2009 had been filed against the petitioners in which when cognizance of the offences was taken under Sections 341, 323, 494/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3(i)(iv)(x)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, vide order dated 14.07.2010, that was challenged before this Court in Cr.M.P.No.958 of 2010. 5. This Court having found the case being lodged maliciously quashed the order taking cognizance. 6. Further it was submitted that since the order taking cognizance has been quashed by this Court, the order under which cognizance of the offence has been taken in the police case on the same allegation upon which the complaint had been lodged is also fit to be quashed. 7. Moreover, the parties have settled their dispute. 8. The submission which has been advanced was not controverted on behalf of the opposite party no.2. Rather, it was stated on behalf of the opposite party no.2 that it is true that the parties have settled their dispute and has entered into a compromise. 9. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, it does appear that on the same allegation, the police case has been lodged which has given rise to this application and also a complaint case bearing Complaint Case No.1649 of 2009. The order under which cognizance of the offence has been taken in complaint case no.1649 of 2009 has already been quashed by this Court in Cr. M.P.No.958 of 2010 when this Court did find that on account of land dispute the case has been lodged to put pressure upon the petitioners to come to her term and thereby the court did find that the allegations which have been made in the compliant are actuated with malice and thereby the case appears to be a case of malicious prosecution. 10. 10. Since the order taking cognizance of the complaint case has already been quashed, the order dated 19.1.2011 under which cognizance of the offences has been taken in the police case also warrants to be quashed as on similar allegation upon which the complaint case had been lodged, this police case has been lodged. 11. Accordingly, entire criminal proceeding of Hazaribagh Sadar (SC/ST) P.S. Case no.33 of 2009 including the order dated 19.1.2011 taking cognizance is hereby quashed. 12. In the result, this application stands allowed. Application allowed.