NARENDRA SINGH BHATIA Vs. NILESH PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed this petition under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C, assailing the order dtd. 24/4/2015 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon in Criminal Revision No. 13 of 2015 whereby the Revisional Court allowed the revision filed by respondent No.1 Nilesh Patel against the order dtd. 21/1/2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon whereby the application filed by respondent No.1 under Sec. 156(3) of Cr.P.C, has been dismissed. The revisional court has allowed the revision and remanded the matter to trial court for deciding the application filed by respondent No.1 under Sec. 156(3) of Cr.P.C, in accordance with law.

(2.) The brief facts as projected by the petitioners are that the petitioners are real brothers. The family of the petitioners are engaged in the business of coal transport since long. The petitioners have purchased a plot situated behind the plot bearing current Khasra No. 4/5 for the storage of coal. The only way to that plot was though Khasra No. 4/5 which belongs to the father of respondent No.1, late Harihar Bhai Patel. The plot bearing present Khasra No. 4/5 has been continued to be in possession and used by the petitioners. The truck and other articles were kept there and to keep a watch over the same a room was built for accommodating the Chowkidar. The land was surrounded with boundary wall with a gate in front to which Harihar Bhai Patel, who is father of respondent No.1, never objected nor he instituted any proceedings against the petitioners.

(3.) Learned Sr. Advocate for the petitioners would submit that the disputed land bearing Khasra No. 4/5 has been continued to be in possession and used by the petitioners and other articles were kept there and to keep a watch over the same a room was built for accommodating the Chowkidar. Harihar Bhai Patel who is father of respondent No.1 never objected nor did he institute any proceedings against the petitioners for possession of the said plot. He would further submit that the factum of possession of the petitioners over the said plot was admitted by the father of respondent No.1 on 12/10/1984 and he died in September, 2012. The respondent No.1, who claims to have acquired American citizenship, came to India a few days before death of his father, leaving behind his family in USA tried to usurp the possession of the plot forcibly but having failed to do so he submitted a false complaint on 16/10/2012 that the petitioners have trespassed over the land and, therefore, he wanted to restore his possession by ousting the petitioners. The police made inquiries and having found that the complaint is not true, they did not take any action, thereafter, respondent No.1 filed another complaint on 3/3/2013 before the Incharge of Police Station, Rajnandgaon and again using his political influence he made a false complaint to the Chief Minister of the State and got it forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, Rajnandgaon to inquire into the matter vide letter dtd. 4/3/2013. Under the political pressure by respondent No.1, Incharge, Police Station Kotwali, Rajnandgaon, filed Istegasa under Sec. 145 of Cr.P.C, arraying the respondent No.1 as party No.1 and the petitioner No.1 as party No.2 on 7/1/2014 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rajnandgaon. The preliminary order was passed and thereafter both parties have filed their respective claims and documents in support of their documents. It has been further contented that the Sub Divisional Magistrate found that no order of restoring of possession of lad of respondent No.1 can be passed and proceeding is untenable and, therefore, the proceedings were dropped by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rajnandgaon.