ORDER : In this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings in connection with Complaint Case No. 127 of 2009 including the order dated 05.10.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh whereby and whereunder cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 466, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. A complaint case was instituted in which it was alleged that a piece of land measuring an area of 2.20 acres in Plot No. 1841, Khata No. 67 in Mouza Kuju was sold by Shri Ram Sharma to Jamuna Das, Shailesh Kumar, Bipin Kumar and others vide registered Sale Deeds dated 02.03.1977. It has been alleged that in the year 2006, Jamuna Das, Sailesh Kumar and Bipin Kumar had sold an area of 80 decimals to the complainant whereas the other purchasers entered into alleged agreement with the complainant for 15 decimals of land and thus complainant claimed 95 decimals of land out of total area of 2.20 acres of land. Allegation has been levelled that the petitioner and his parent in collusion with the office of the Circle Officer, Mandu got the name of Smt. Radha Devi mutated fraudulently and accordingly she executed a registered Deed of Sale on 28.08.2004 in favour of the petitioner for an area of 60 decimals. 3. After the complaint case was instituted the same was sent to the police under the provisions of Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure pursuant to which Mandu P.S. Case No. 479 of 2007 was instituted. After the investigation the police has submitted final form showing the dispute to be civil in nature and on being noticed a protest petition was filed by the informant and the same was treated as a complaint petition and after conducting enquiry cognizance was taken by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh on 05.10.2009. 4. Heard Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Siddharth Barelia, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire dispute is civil in nature and only in order to create pressure upon the petitioner the First Information Report has been instituted. Heard Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Siddharth Barelia, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire dispute is civil in nature and only in order to create pressure upon the petitioner the First Information Report has been instituted. It has been submitted that the order passed in Mutation Case No. 488 of 1994-95 was challenged but the same was dismissed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Ramgarh against which the opposite party no. 2 was preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh and being aggrieved by the order passed in appeal the petitioner and others had preferred a revision application which was allowed and the case was remitted back to the Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh for passing a fresh order. Learned counsel submits that subsequently on remand the Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh had decided the appeal in favour of the father of the petitioner. It has been submitted that the contention of the petitioner with respect to the ownership of the land in question has been substantiated by the orders passed by the revenue authorities and, therefore, no criminal case can lie against the petitioner. 6. Mr. Siddharth Barelia, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2, has submitted that the accused Radha Devi had got her name entered into the revenue records surreptitiously by encircling the name of the recorded tenant in Register-II. It has been submitted that the accused persons in collusion with Circle Officer had obtained rent receipt and, thereafter, Radha Devi had executed a registered Deed of Sale dated 28.04.2004 in favour of her son, the present petitioner. It has also been submitted that such act on the part of the petitioner clearly demonstrates the cheating and forgery which has been carried out in a consented manner by the accused persons. 7. The First Information Report which was instituted on the basis of the complaint petition being sent to the police under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. ended in submission of final form as after investigation the dispute was found to be civil in nature. The protest petition filed by the complainant was treated as a complaint petition and subsequent thereto cognizance was taken. The protest petition filed by the complainant was treated as a complaint petition and subsequent thereto cognizance was taken. The entire dispute centers around a piece of land which was mutated in the name of the mother of the petitioner and who had subsequently executed a registered Sale Deed in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner had also got his name mutated and the proceedings were taken up to the revisional court wherein on remand the Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh had decided the appeal in favour of the father of the petitioner. 8. It further appears that the application made by the opposite party no. 2 for mutation of the land in respect of Plot No. 1841, Khata No. 67 in Mouza Kuju was rejected since the opposite party no. 2 was never in possession over the land in question. The attendant circumstances thus suggest that the petitioner is being prosecuted for a vague allegation which has already been decided and concluded by the revenue authorities and, therefore, the initiation of the criminal case seems to be a vexatious litigation imposed upon the petitioner and if allowed to continue the same shall result in abuse of the process of court. 9. Consequent to the discussions made hereinabove, I find merit in this application and the same is allowed and the entire criminal proceedings as against the petitioner in connection with Complaint Case No. 127 of 2009 including the order dated 05.10.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh is, hereby, quashed and set aside. Application allowed.