KAUMUDINI LAKHIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the applicants-original accused nos. 1 to 3 of Criminal Inquiry Case No. 92/2002 to quash and set aside the impugned Complaint, being Criminal Inquiry Case No. 92/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) as well as the order dated 30/10/2002 passed in the said proceedings issuing summons/process against the applicants.

(2.) IT appears that respondent no. 2-original complainant had initiated criminal proceedings against the applicants by instituting Criminal Inquiry Case No. 92/2002 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code alleging interalia that the father of the applicants had executed one agreement to sell in his favour with respect to the property/land bearing Survey No. 298 of Village Hasol, Taluka Naroda, District Ahmedabad and subsequently their father also issued allotment/possession letter and subsequently he died and thereafter the applicants executed sale deed in favour of respondent no. 2-original complainant and his wife by sale deed dated 13/05/1999 and though there was a charge of one City Bank on the said land the same was not disclosed to them and, therefore, it was alleged that the applicants have committed the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. In the said Complaint, the learned Magistrate initially passed an order for inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and thereafter by the impugned order dated 30/10/2002 the learned 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) has directed to register the said Complaint as Criminal Case and directed to issue process/summons against the applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid, the applicants-original accused have preferred the present Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) SHRI B.P. Gupta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2 had stated on the earlier occasion that he has no instructions in the matter and, therefore, fresh notice was issued upon respondent no. 2-original complainant as he had already retired from the matter. Despite of service of fresh notice upon respondent no. 2, nobody appears on behalf of respondent no. 2.