Neeraj Tiwari, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Ranvijay Chaubey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Anurag Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet as well as entire proceedings in Criminal Case No.2264 of 2008 (State Vs. Bhule) arising out of the Case Crime No.1172 of 2007, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, Police Station Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar.
(2.) Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that with regard to ownership of land in dispute, one Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.32629 of 2003 is pending before this Court, in which Court has passed order of status quo. He further submitted that the title of land is still not decided and he has sold out his share of land to one Raj Dhari Maurya son of Muneshwar Maurya. He further submitted that at this stage, the opposite party no.2 has filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for lodging an FIR against the applicants. The said application was ultimately rejected by Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar vide order dated 04.12.2006 on the ground that even if the land was sold in violation of order of High Court, High Court may itself take action in accordance with law and prima facie no cognizable offence is made out.
(3.) He further submitted that after dismissal of said application for the very same cause of action, opposite party no.2 has lodged an FIR dated 17.11.2007, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station-Dadri, District-Gautam Budh Nagar, in which charge sheet was submitted and summoning order dated 27.2.2008 has been passed. He placed reliance upon Section 362 Cr.P.C. and in light of that submitted that once the Magistrate had rejected the application filed by opposite party no.2, no summoning order can be passed again by the Magistrate in another charge sheet which was based on the same facts.;