RAGHUVAR DAYAL SINGHAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondent No.1 Mr. B. N. Mishra, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.2.

(2.) The present petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the order dtd. 4/5/2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, whereby the application under Sec. 156(3) of CrPC has been allowed and ordered for registration of FIR and submission of charge sheet as well as criminal proceeding of the Criminal Case No. 3377 of 2018 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur between State of Chhattisgarh Vs. Kamal Kishore and others.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the Civil Suit bearing No. 130-A/2016 has been brought by the respondent No.2 under Power of Attorney of Murari Lal Gupta, Devesh Gupta and Smt. Shalini Bansal, who are the plaintiff, for declaration of title over the suit land bearing Kh No. 676/8 area 0.18 acre situate at Juna Bilaspur, District Bilaspur coupled with prayer to declare the sale deed dtd. 29/3/2016 as null and void which has been executed by petitioner No.1 to respondent No.4. The said suit is pending for consideration before the learned Civil Judge Class-II, Bilaspur. The son namely Shrey Chouksay of the said power of attorney holder i.e. respondent No.2 Mukesh Chouksay is tenant of petitioner No.1 over the property known as 'Hotel Panchwati' (now Rasoi-In) situate at Link Road, Bilaspur. The dispute of tenancy is also pending before the Rent Controller Authority, Bilaspur as well as before this Hon'ble Court in ARBA No. 119 of 2018. The other Civil Suit bearing No. 248-A/2017 was filed by Smt. Rani Gupta, who is daughter of petitioner No.1 for declaration of her share over the property in which the complainant Mukesh Chouksay is doing his business and is in possession as tenant. In this suit also he represent the plaintiff being power-of-attorney holder of her.