MURIT RAM SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the facts and issues involved in both the petitions are similar, they are being considered and decided by this common judgment.

(2.) Challenge in these petitions is to the order dtd. 12/6/2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Katghora, District Korba, by which it has directed the Police to register an FIR against the petitioners. The petitioners also challenge the consequent registration of the FIR bearing Crime No. 136/2018 at Police Station, Dipka, District Korba, for the ofences under Ss. 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The facts, as projected by the petitioners, are that the respondent No. 2 iled a complaint under Sec. 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katghora on 10/1/2018 against the petitioners alleging that the petitioner-Paushik Ram Sahu by portraying himself as the husband of the private respondent, has obtained a job in the SECL in lieu of acquisition of land bearing Khasra No. 103/15, Area 0.25 Acre, situated at village- Bijhra, Tehsil Katghora, District- Korba which is owned by the private respondent. The petitioner-Murit Ram Sahu is the alleged husband of the private respondent who is a attesting witness in the sale deed dtd. 10/2/1981, by which the private respondent obtained the land. The petitioner-Paushik Ram Sahu is the brother-in-law of the petitioner-Murit Ram Sahu. The said land was purchased by the father of the private respondent from one Thakur Singh through a registered Sale Deed date 10/2/1981 and after mutation of the land records the private respondent's name was entered into the land records. It has further been alleged by the complainant that the land was acquired by the SECL in 1989 with a provision that the owner of the land or a family member would be provided with the job in lieu of acquisition. The complainant made multiple representations to the SECL and it was informed to her on 9/8/2017 that the aforesaid land belonged to one Geeta Bai daughter of Sahdev and lieu of acquisition of said land, her husband i.e. petitioner-Paushik Ram Sahu was given a job with the SECL. It is the allegation of the complainant that the petitioner-Paushik Ram Sahu has forged the documents to portray the complainant Geeta Bai as his wife and obtained employment at SECL in October, 1989. It has been alleged that Murit Ram Sahu is the husband of the complainant Geeta Bai and they got married in the year 1972-73 and have 2 sons out of the wedlock. It has further been contended by the complainant that the petitioner-Murit Ram Sahu forged the documents to portray complainant as wife of Paushik Ram Sahu who is his brother in law and helped Paushik Ram Sahu to obtain a job at SECL. The petitioners along with other co accused namely Bhuwan Lal Sahu have forged the documents and obtained the job at SECL by forging the signature of complainant. The said complaint was registered as criminal case No. unregistered.