Research › Search › Judgment

Meghalaya High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 219 (MEG)

Krishan Kumar Goenka v. State of Meghalaya

2022-08-16

W.DIENGDOH

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. S. Jindal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P Yobin, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2. The State-respondent No.1 is represented by Mr. K. P. Bhattacharjee, learned GA. 2. Bereft of unnecessary details the facts of this case as could be gathered from the averments made in this petition and the annexures thereto would show that the case of the petitioners is that they are the owner and in possession in a plot of land situated at Keating road, Shillong being plot No.105 (I), which by virtue of a lease agreement issued by the Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills, Shillong stands in the name of the petitioner No.1 and his deceased brother late Jagdish Prasad Goenka, who was the father of petitioner No.2 herein. The total area of the land is about 9146.53 sq. m. 3. The petitioners have been in possession of the land in all along without any let or hindrances. However, in the month of January, 2021 the petitioner No.2 received the notice dated 20-01-2021 issued by the Executive Magistrate, East Khasi Hills District Shillong under Section 145 Cr. P.C in connection with C.R Case No.1 (A) of 2021. The petitioner No.2 on receipt of the said notice enter appearance before the learned Executive Magistrate on 29-01-2021 and has also sought copies of the entire case record including the FIR dated 29-12-2020 said to have been lodged by the respondent No.2 herein on an allegation that the petitioners have encroached upon the land in question and have erected barricades thereupon. 4. In this regard, a police report dated 04-01-2021 was also filed stating that the dispute is purely civil in nature. In the meantime, another learned Executive Magistrate Shri. T. Marwein was endorsed with the case and had passed an order dated 16-03-2022 directing the Investigating Officer (I/O) to file a status report, in compliance thereof, status report was filed by the I/O dated 29-03-2022. In the said report, it is reiterated that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature involving a land dispute. 5. In the said report, it is reiterated that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature involving a land dispute. 5. The learned Executive Magistrate on consideration of the said police report dated 29-03-2022 on the self-same day has passed an order firstly, expressing satisfaction that the dispute between the petitioners and respondent herein over the aforementioned plot of land still exist and secondly, that the parties are directed to file the written statement with relevant documents and thirdly, that the parties are also directed to restrain from carrying out any activities in the place of dispute. 6. It is against the said impugned order dated 29-03-2022 passed by the learned Executive Magistrate that the petitioner has approached this Court with this instant petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C with a prayer to quash the said impugned order as well as the related proceedings. 7. Mr. P. Yobin, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 at the hearing has candidly submitted that a perusal of the impugned order would reveal the same may not stand the scrutiny of law, inasmuch as in the impugned order the learned Executive Magistrate though expressing his satisfaction that the dispute between the parties exist, yet no specific grounds have been detailed in the said impugned order. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned order may be set aside and quashed with a liberty to the learned Executive Magistrate to proceed with a fresh proceeding under the relevant provisions of law. 8. Mr. K. P. Bhattacharjee, learned GA has submitted that in the light of the submission and concession made by the respondent No.2 this Court may pass necessary order in this regard. However, it is pointed out that in the related report of the I/O there is a clear indication that a dispute exists between the parties which may lead to a breach of peace, thereby necessitating relevant proceedings, howbeit, at the relevant time. 9. Having given careful consideration to the submission of the parties, at this stage this Court would not enter into the merit of the case but on the basis of the concession made which is on the basis of well-settled principle of law and even if it entails a detailed hearing, the conclusions would have been the same, this petition can be disposed of accordingly. 10. 10. The impugned order dated 29-03-2022 and the related proceedings in C.R. Case No. 1 (A) of 2021 before the learned Executive Magistrate, East Khasi Hills, Shillong is hereby set aside and quashed. 11. The prayer of the learned GA with liberty to be given to the learned Executive Magistrate to resume fresh proceedings, if necessary, cannot be allowed in this proceeding. However, as and when the requirement demands, the authority concerned withdraw proceedings in accordance with law. 12. In view of the above, this petition is accordingly disposed of.