CrPC Section 156 — Police power to investigate cognizable cases

Judgments citing CrPC Section 156

1. M. Abhishek vs The State of Telangana on 22 August, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana22 Aug 2023

   Case Name: M. Abhishek vs The State of Telangana on 22 August, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 22 August, 2023 Bench: Alok Aradhe, C.J. and T. Vinod Kumar, J. Subject: Writ Appeal – Dismissal of Writ Petition seeking direction to register FIR – Police Enquiry finding allegations incorrect – Alternative remedy available under CrPC. Key Legal Propositions 1. Where police authorities, upon conducting an enquiry, find allegations made in a complaint to be incorrect, the Court may not interfere with the order dismissing the writ petition seeking direction to register an FIR. 2. An aggrieved party whose complaint is not registered has alternative remedies available under Sections 154, 156, and 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). 3. The Court will not interfere with an order dismissing a writ petition if the petitioner has alternative remedies available in law. Judgment Summary Background: The Writ Appeal arises from the dismissal of Writ Petition No. 40933 of 2022. The Petitioner, M. Abhishek, filed the writ petition seeking a direction to the police to register a First Information Report (FIR) based on his complaint allegi

2. Lokireddy Satyanarayana Reddy vs The State of A.P. on 14 June, 2023

   High Court of Andhra Pradesh14 Jun 2023

   Case Name: Lokireddy Satyanarayana Reddy vs The State of A.P. on 14 June, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Date of Judgment: 14-06-2023 Bench: Duppala Venkata Ramana, J Subject: Criminal Procedure – Quashing of Criminal Proceedings – Abuse of Process – Civil Dispute with Criminal Texture Key Legal Propositions 1. Criminal proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if the allegations, even when taken at face value, do not constitute a cognizable offence or disclose a case against the accused. 2. If a dispute is essentially civil in nature, attempting to give it a criminal colour constitutes an abuse of the process of court, and criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue. 3. The pendency of a civil suit concerning the same subject matter and issues, particularly regarding property rights and genuineness of documents, is a significant factor in determining whether criminal proceedings are an abuse of process. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Petition sought quashing of proceedings in C.C.No.51 of 2013, filed based on a private complaint alleging offences under Sections 420, 468, 471 read with 120-B IPC and 34 IPC. The complai

3. Kaja Rama Rao vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 23 November, 2023 & Santosh Kumar Bavisetty vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 23 November, 2023

   High Court of Andhra Pradesh23 Nov 2023

   Case Name: Kaja Rama Rao vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 23 November, 2023 & Santosh Kumar Bavisetty vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 23 November, 2023 Court: The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Date of Judgment: 23.11.2023 Bench: Smt. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratap Subject: Writ Petition; Criminal Procedure; Registration of FIR; Mandamus; Alternate Remedy Key Legal Propositions 1. A writ of Mandamus compelling the police to register an FIR can be denied if alternative remedies under the CrPC (Sections 154(3), 156(3), 190, and 200) are available and not exhausted. 2. The decision in *Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P.* (2014) 2 SCC 1, mandates registration of an FIR upon disclosure of a cognizable offence, but does not address the maintainability of a writ petition seeking to enforce this duty when alternative remedies exist. 3. The Supreme Court has consistently held that courts should be reluctant to entertain writ petitions when effective statutory remedies are available, and the issue does not involve a violation of fundamental rights or jurisdictional error. Judgment Summary Background: These writ petitions were filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

4. E.V.Satish @ Satish Kumar vs The State of A.P. on 14 July, 2023

   High Court of Andhra Pradesh14 Jul 2023

   Case Name: E.V.Satish @ Satish Kumar vs The State of A.P. on 14 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Date of Judgment: 14 July, 2023 Bench: Justice DUPPALA VENKATA RAMANA Subject: Criminal Law – Quashing of Criminal Proceedings – Section 482 Cr.P.C. – Forgery – Abuse of Process Key Legal Propositions 1. High Courts can exercise plenary powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of process, particularly when allegations do not disclose a cognizable offence or constitute an offence at all. 2. A criminal proceeding can be quashed if the allegations, even if true, disclose a civil dispute and are more appropriately adjudicated in a civil forum. 3. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and only in rare and extraordinary circumstances, and the Court should not conduct a trial at the stage of considering a petition for quashing. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioners/accused (A.1 to A.4) filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.74 of 2013, registered by Alipiri Police Station, Tirupati, for offences under Sections 464, 465, 467, 471, and 420

5. Sunder Kukreja vs. The State on 13 February, 2023

   High Court of Delhi13 Feb 2023

   Case Name: Sunder Kukreja vs. The State on 13 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 13.02.2023 Bench: Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Subject: Criminal Law – Section 482 Cr.P.C. – Quashing of Charge – Stalking, Outraging Modesty, Criminal Intimidation – Framing of Charge – Scope of Judicial Review Key Legal Propositions 1. At the stage of framing of charge, the Court is required to consider the material with a view to find out if there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed the offence, and not for arriving at a conclusion of conviction. 2. High Courts exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should not embark upon an appreciation of evidence in a minute manner, and cannot conduct a mini-trial. 3. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is an extraordinary power and should be exercised only in exceptional circumstances, particularly when allegations are absurd, improbable, or constitute an abuse of process. Judgment Summary Background: The petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought to set aside the order framing charges under Sections 354/354D/506 IPC and the order dismissing the revision against the framing of charge. The charges stemme

6. Ajay Singh vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi on 27 February, 2023

   High Court of Delhi27 Feb 2023

   Case Name: Ajay Singh vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi on 27 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 27.02.2023 Bench: Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Subject: Criminal Law, Quashing of FIR, Section 482 Cr.P.C., Outraging Modesty, Criminal Intimidation Key Legal Propositions 1. Courts should exercise the power to quash FIRs sparingly, with circumspection, and only in rare cases. 2. When considering a petition to quash an FIR, the Court should not conduct an inquiry into the reliability or genuineness of the allegations, but rather determine if a cognizable offence is disclosed. 3. The functions of the judiciary and the police are complementary, and courts should not interfere with police investigations unless there is a clear abuse of process or a miscarriage of justice. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner sought quashing of FIR No. 0954/2020 registered at Police Station Bindapur, Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 506/509 of the IPC. The complainant alleged that the petitioner made inappropriate comments, persistently contacted her, falsely informed her of her husband’s accident, and proposed an illicit relationship. The petitioner argue

7. Naveen Kumar Sharma vs Asst. Commissioner Food and Civil Supply and Ors on 25 July, 2023

   High Court of Delhi25 Jul 2023

   Case Name: Naveen Kumar Sharma vs Asst. Commissioner Food and Civil Supply and Ors on 25 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 25 July, 2023 Bench: Justice Subramonium Prasad Subject: Writ Petition – Fair Price Shop Allotment, Allegations of Fraud, Criminal Proceedings Key Legal Propositions 1. Writ courts, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, generally do not direct the registration of FIRs or conduct fishing/roving inquiries. 2. Petitioners with grievances regarding non-registration of FIRs or inadequate police investigations should first exhaust remedies under Sections 154(3) and 36 CrPC, and then approach the Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC. 3. Courts should avoid parallel proceedings on the same subject matter, particularly when criminal proceedings are already pending before a competent court. Judgment Summary Background: The Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a CBI investigation into alleged irregularities in the Food and Supply Department concerning approximately 230 ration shops, revocation of the allotment of fair price shop No. 6721, registration of an FIR against the Respondents, and a stay on the renewa

8. Rakesh Sharma vs State of NCT of Delhi on 29 May, 2023

   High Court of Delhi29 May 2023

   Case Name: Rakesh Sharma vs State of NCT of Delhi on 29 May, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 29.05.2023 Bench: Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Subject: Criminal Law – Section 482 Cr.P.C. – Quashing of FIR and Charges – Offence under Sections 406/420 IPC – Entrustment – Prima Facie Case – Abuse of Process. Key Legal Propositions 1. A High Court exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or Section 397 Cr.P.C. cannot weigh the correctness or sufficiency of evidence but must examine if prima facie a case for an offence is made out. 2. Quashing of charges or FIR is permissible only in exceptional cases and on rare occasions, and the Court should not interfere with a trial unless strong reasons exist to avoid abuse of the process of law. 3. The scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing an FIR is limited to cases where allegations do not constitute an offence, are absurd or improbable, or where a legal bar exists, or the proceedings are malicious. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner challenged an order sustaining the charge under Section 406 IPC, while discharging charges under Sections 467/471/506 IPC, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. The FIR all

9. Mamta Nagpal vs. State of GNCTD & Ors. on 03 March, 2023

   High Court of Delhi3 Mar 2023

   Case Name: Mamta Nagpal vs. State of GNCTD & Ors. on 03 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 03.03.2023 Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Mahajan Subject: Criminal Revision Petition, Section 482 CrPC, Registration of FIR, Cognizable Offence Key Legal Propositions 1. A Magistrate is not bound to register a case in every instance; they must apply their mind to determine if allegations disclose a cognizable offence requiring police investigation. 2. An order directing registration of an FIR under Section 156(3) CrPC, if it effectively terminates proceedings, is a final order revisable under Section 397 CrPC. 3. The Magistrate’s role is not merely to act as a postman; they must assess whether the allegations disclose a cognizable offence before directing investigation. Judgment Summary Background: The petition challenges the order of the Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) setting aside the Metropolitan Magistrate’s (MM) order directing registration of an FIR under Sections 405, 406, 410, 411, and 414 IPC based on a complaint alleging fraud and misappropriation related to a property. The complainant alleged that respondents registered a company at the property addr

10. Bhagat Singh & Anr. vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.) on 25 July, 2023

    High Court of Delhi25 Jul 2023

    Case Name: Bhagat Singh & Anr. vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.) on 25 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 25.07.2023 Bench: Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Subject: Criminal Writ Petition – Quashing of FIR – Allegations of fraud, breach of contract, and dishonest inducement. Key Legal Propositions 1. Courts should exercise caution and circumspection when considering the quashing of an FIR, particularly at the nascent stage of investigation. 2. A High Court, while exercising its power under Section 482 CrPC or Article 226, should not appreciate evidence or examine the correctness of material on record, as these are matters for trial. 3. The scope of judicial review in FIR quashing petitions is limited to determining if the allegations disclose a cognizable offence or constitute an abuse of process, not a full examination of the merits. Judgment Summary Background: The Petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 186/2022 registered for offences under Sections 406/420/120B/34 of the IPC, alleging a dispute arising from a collaboration agreement for land development. The Petitioners claimed the FIR was a counterblast to a previously filed complaint and tha

11. Manoj Krishan Ahuja vs State of NCT of Delhi on 24 April, 2023

    High Court of Delhi24 Apr 2023

    Case Name: Manoj Krishan Ahuja vs State of NCT of Delhi on 24 April, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 24.04.2023 Bench: Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Subject: Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994; Cognizance of Offences; Police Investigation; Quashing of FIR. Key Legal Propositions 1. Cognizance of offences under the PC&PNDT Act can only be taken upon a complaint filed by the Appropriate Authority or an authorized officer, as per Section 28 of the Act. Cognizance taken based solely on a police chargesheet is impermissible. 2. While the PC&PNDT Act does not explicitly bar police involvement, the primary responsibility for investigation and complaint filing rests with the Appropriate Authority. Police assistance is permissible but should not supersede the Authority’s role. 3. The power of the Courts to quash FIRs under Section 482 CrPC should be exercised sparingly, and the Courts should not embark on an enquiry into the reliability of allegations at the initial stage. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner challenged the cognizance taken by the Trial Court on a chargesheet filed by the police in co

12. XYZ vs. State of Gujarat on 22 December, 2023

    High Court of Gujarat22 Dec 2023

    Case Name: XYZ vs. State of Gujarat on 22 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad Date of Judgment: 22/12/2023 Bench: Honourable Mr. Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar Subject: Criminal – Investigation, Section 482 CrPC, Sexual Harassment, Human Trafficking, Police Inaction, Magistrate’s Duty Key Legal Propositions 1. A Magistrate, upon receiving a complaint disclosing a cognizable offence, is duty-bound to direct police investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC, particularly in cases involving serious allegations like sexual harassment and human trafficking. 2. A mere alternative remedy is not a bar to exercising powers under Section 482 CrPC when seeking to prevent abuse of process or secure justice. 3. Police authorities have a statutory duty to investigate complaints disclosing cognizable offences and failure to do so can constitute an offence under Section 166A IPC. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner, a Bulgarian citizen, filed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of an order dismissing her private complaint before a Chief Judicial Magistrate and directing the police to register an FIR against certain individuals for alleged sexual harassme

13. Noorjahanbibi Mubinali Saiyed vs State of Gujarat on 25 January, 2023

    High Court of Gujarat25 Jan 2023

    Case Name: Noorjahanbibi Mubinali Saiyed vs State of Gujarat on 25 January, 2023 Court: High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad Date of Judgment: 25/01/2023 Bench: Hon’ble Ms. Justice Gita Gopi Subject: Criminal Law – Application for quashing of FIR – Abuse of Process – Section 482 CrPC – Negotiable Instruments Act – Money Lenders Act Key Legal Propositions 1. Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 can be exercised to quash an FIR when it constitutes an abuse of process of law or to secure the ends of justice. 2. An FIR can be quashed if the allegations, even taken at face value, do not disclose a cognizable offence or if the complaint is a counterblast to a previously settled matter. 3. The Court may quash an FIR if it is manifestly malicious, instituted with an ulterior motive, or based on absurd and improbable allegations. Judgment Summary Background: The applicant filed an application under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of FIR No. I-0032/2019 registered for offences under Sections 384, 386, 506(2) and 114 of the IPC, as well as Sections 40 and 42 of the Money Lenders Act. The FIR was lodged by the respondent no. 2 alleging that she had borrowed money

14. Jamshan vs. Director General of Police on 03 November, 2023

    High Court of Kerala3 Nov 2023

    Case Name: Jamshan and Others vs. Director General of Police and Others on 03 November, 2023 Court: High Court of Kerala Date of Judgment: 03 November, 2023 Bench: P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J. Subject: Criminal Writ Petition – Application for Further Investigation Key Legal Propositions 1. An accused person does not have the right to dictate the manner or agency conducting a criminal investigation. 2. Courts should exercise extraordinary jurisdiction to transfer investigations sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances to preserve the administration of criminal justice. 3. Accused persons generally lack standing to request a change in the investigating agency or further investigation, particularly in ongoing Sessions cases. Judgment Summary Background: This writ petition was filed by accused individuals in Crime No. 930/2020 of Kalpetta Police Station, alleging offences under Sections 302, 341, 342, and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners sought a re-investigation of the case and removal from the list of accused, claiming their innocence. They had previously filed a petition under Section 156(3) CrPC and submitted representations to higher author

15. Vincy Pincheiro & Ors. vs. Station House Officer & Ors. on 05 December, 2023

    High Court of Kerala5 Dec 2023

    Case Name: Vincy Pincheiro & Ors. vs. Station House Officer & Ors. on 05 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Kerala Date of Judgment: 05 December, 2023 Bench: P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J. Subject: Criminal Writ Petition – Investigation Transfer & Supervision Key Legal Propositions 1. Courts can direct the transfer of investigation to a superior officer or the constitution of a Special Investigation Team to ensure impartiality and proper investigation. 2. Supervisory oversight by a higher-ranking officer can enhance the quality and fairness of an ongoing investigation. 3. The Court can dispose of a writ petition by issuing directions for investigation, even at the preliminary stage, if deemed necessary for justice. Judgment Summary Background: The Petitioners approached the High Court seeking a direction to transfer the investigation of two FIRs (Exts. P1 & P2) to a superior officer or a Special Investigation Team, alleging potential bias in the ongoing investigation by the Njarakkal Police Station. The Petitioner is the accused in Ext. P1 and the defacto complainant in Ext. P2. A report from the Sub Inspector of Police, Njarakkal, was submitted during the proceedings. Held: A. On

16. Smt. Neeta wd/o Bhupendra Khara vs. Umesh s/o Ratanlal Jakhotiya & Ors. on September 26, 2002

    Bombay High Court

    Case Name: Smt. Neeta vs. Umesh & Ors. on September 26, 2002 Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench Date of Judgment: September 26, 2002 Bench: Vinay Joshi, J. Subject: Criminal Procedure – Issuance of Process – Quashing of Criminal Proceedings – Abuse of Process – Prima Facie Case Key Legal Propositions 1. For issuance of process, a complainant must establish a prima facie case. 2. Directing an individual to face criminal prosecution is a serious matter requiring sufficient material evidence. 3. Continuation of a complaint without supporting material constitutes an abuse of the process of court. Judgment Summary Background: These two writ petitions challenge the order of issuance of process dated 09.09.2021 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akola, and the subsequent rejection of revision dated 14.03.2022 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, in a case alleging offences under Sections 406, 468, 471, 420, 34, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The petitions were filed by the accused, Neeta and Santosh, against whom process was issued based on a complaint by Umesh Jakhotiya. The complaint alleged fraudulent sale of a plot of land owned by the complaina

17. Indrajit Shankarrao Nageshkar vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. on 22 September, 2022

    Bombay High Court22 Sept 2022

    Case Name: Indrajit Shankarrao Nageshkar vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. on 22 September, 2022 Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Date of Judgment: 22 September, 2022 Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal, J. Subject: Criminal Law – Power of Attorney – Alleged Misappropriation of Property – Discharge Application – Criminal Revision – Scope of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. – Prima Facie Case – Trial Proceedings. Key Legal Propositions 1. The scope of considering an application for discharge is limited to determining if the allegations, taken at face value, disclose all the ingredients of the alleged offence and raise a strong suspicion, not merely any suspicion. 2. An order under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., if not challenged and attaining finality, cannot be re-agitated at a later stage, especially after investigation and charge-sheet filing. 3. A false representation regarding ownership and seeking division of property through a Power of Attorney obtained for a different property, leading to unfair advantage, can constitute a prima facie case for offences like cheating, misappropriation, or criminal breach of trust. Judgment Summary Background: The peti

18. Pushpa Anil Jadhav & Ors. vs The State of Maharashtra & Anr. on 07 July, 2022

    Bombay High Court7 Jul 2022

    Case Name: Pushpa Anil Jadhav & Ors. vs The State of Maharashtra & Anr. on 07 July, 2022 Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad. Date of Judgment: July 7, 2022 Bench: C. V. Bhadang & Sandipkumar C. More, JJ. Subject: Criminal Law – Quashing of FIR/Charge-sheet – Principles governing – Absence of specific role attributed to petitioners – Applicability of *State of Haryana and Others vs. Bhajan Lal and Others*. Key Legal Propositions 1. A prayer for quashing of an FIR/charge-sheet will be considered based on principles laid down in *State of Haryana and Others vs. Bhajan Lal and Others*, including whether the allegations, even taken at face value, disclose a cognizable offence or attribute a specific role to the accused. 2. If the allegations in the FIR, even when accepted in their entirety, do not *prima facie* constitute an offence or establish a case against the accused, the FIR/charge-sheet may be quashed. 3. The Court must be cautious while exercising its jurisdiction to quash an FIR/charge-sheet at the threshold, but may do so when the allegations do not attribute any specific role or overt act to the accused. Judgment Summary Background: The Pet

19. Kushi Chand Vadde vs Sri S Sreedha Rao & Ors. on 12 April, 2022

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana12 Apr 2022

    Case Name: Kushi Chand Vadde vs Sri S Sreedha Rao & Ors. on 12 April, 2022 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 12 April, 2022 Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J. and Abhinand Kumar Shavili, J. Subject: Writ Appeal – Maintainability, Criminal Jurisdiction, Anticipatory Bail, Civil & Commercial Disputes Key Legal Propositions 1. A writ appeal is not maintainable against an order granting blanket anticipatory bail and restraining the State from taking action in criminal matters arising from civil/commercial disputes. 2. An order passed by a Single Judge quashing criminal proceedings, even if arising from a petition under Article 226, is an exercise of criminal jurisdiction for the purpose of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. 3. The nature of the proceedings (criminal) and not merely the method of initiation, determines whether a writ appeal is maintainable under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. Judgment Summary Background: The appeal arises from an order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.37689 of 2021, which directed the State not to arrest the respondents in connection with civil and commercial disputes. The respondents had filed

20. P.Pattabhi Reddy vs The State of A.P. and Others on 16 September, 2022

    High Court of Andhra Pradesh16 Sept 2022

    Case Name: P.Pattabhi Reddy vs The State of A.P. and Others on 16 September, 2022 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Date of Judgment: 16-09-2022 Bench: Duppala Venkata Ramana, J Subject: Criminal Law – Quashing of Criminal Proceedings – Section 482 Cr.P.C. – Unlawful Assembly – Damage to Public Property – Election Offences. Key Legal Propositions 1. Section 482 Cr.P.C. allows High Courts to quash criminal proceedings if the allegations, even taken at face value, do not constitute an offence or lack sufficient grounds for proceeding. 2. In cases involving unlawful assemblies, all members are vicariously liable for offences committed by the assembly, provided their presence and participation are established. 3. While exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court should not act as a trial court but assess the prima facie existence of grounds for proceeding against the accused. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Petition sought quashing of proceedings in Crime No.50 of 2013, registered at B.N.Kandriga Police Station, Chittoor District, for offences under Sections 147, 148, 435, 109, 353 IPC, Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Prope