SANJAY NIHICHALANI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the accused/applicant for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.05/2023 registered at Police Station Dharsiwa, Raipur for the offence punishable under Sec. 420 of IPC.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Ajay Nihichalani son of late Idandas Nihichalani, lodged a written complaint on 2/1/2023 at Police Station Dharsiwa, Raipur alleging that his cousin (the present applicant) who is son of his uncle namely Kanhaiya Lal in a fraudulent manner got mutated his name in the property of his late grand father after his death by using forged signature and in connivance with concerned Tahsildar and clerks also obtained order dtd. 23/11/2015 in a revenue case. On the basis of aforesaid complaint, on the same day, FIR No.005/2023 was lodged.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that as far as order dtd. 23/11/2015 is concerned, the said order is a judicial order and has been passed by learned Revenue Court, therefore, unless the said order is not set aside by the competent authority, the police cannot go beyond it and register an FIR by mentioning that the order has been passed in a forged manner. He further submit that other family members of the complainant have assailed the order dtd. 23/11/2015 before learned Sub Divisional Officer by filing a duly constituted appeal. He submits that the case is purely of a civil nature and as there is a civil dispute between the family members of the parties. Learned counsel further submit that there is a clear violation of principles laid down in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 2 SCC 1. He also draws attention of this Court to the application filed by the grand father of the applicant namely Nanankram Nihchalni filed before the Revenue Court and his statement recorded on 20/4/2015 before Additional Tehsildar, Dharsiwa. He submits that after completion of the proceedings, the final order was passed on 23/11/2015 in Case No.7-A/A-27/2015-16. Learned counsel further submit that from the perusal of entire proceeding before the Revenue Court and from the face of the complaint itself, no offence is attracted under Sec. 420 of IPC as the impugned order was passed in judicial proceeding. However, concerned officer of the police authority lodged an FIR, which is nothing but abuse of the process of law for creating pressure on the applicant and his family members. Therefore, the applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. He also submit that the applicant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed on him, if this Court inclines to grant anticipatory bail.