MEGHSHYAM RAWAT Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Sudhir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State.

(2.) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, CrPC), the petitioner has prayed for quashing the summoning order dated 19.1.2006 and the order dated 17.10.2006 framing the charge against the petitioner as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2235/2006 Jagdish Chandra Joshi v. Meghshyam Rawat & Ors. under Section 406, 420, 465, 120-B IPC pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate/Munsif Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital.

(3.) Facts, in brief, are that the respondent no. 3 lodged an FIR against the petitioner and another co-accused CS Pant stating that he was serving outside his house and he made the banama of his land in favour of the co-accused CS Pant on his assurance that he shall get recorded the entries of his land in the revenue records and will also get sanctioned the map of his house. But co-accused CS Pant misused the said banama and he in collusion with the petitioner took a loan in the name of petitioner from the State Bank of Patiyala, Haldwani and made him the guarantor of the said loan by mortgaging his land and producing false documents and photographs before the bank. The complainant came to know about this fact on 28.10.2005 when he got the information from his home that a notice for recovery of the said loan has been received from the bank. He contacted the said bank and came to know the aforesaid acts of the petitioner and the co-accused CS Pant. Thereafter he gave a legal notice through his Advocate to the accused but the said notice was not replied. Police refused to lodged the FIR, hence the instant complaint was lodged by the respondent no. 3. Learned trial court after recording the statement of the complainant under Section 200 CrPC and the statements of the witnesses under Section 202 CrPC, came to the conclusion that a prima facie case under Section 406, 420, 465 IPC is made out against the petitioner and the another co-accused and accordingly summoned them vide order dated 19.1.2006. Thereafter recording the evidence, charges were framed against the petitioner and the another co-accused under Section 406, 420, 465, 120-B IPC vide order dated 17.10.2006.