RAKESHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants original accused have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in case of their arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R No.I74 of 2016 before Vakaner Taluka Police Station, District: Morbi for the offences under Sections 405, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code..

(2.) Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the complainant filed an application in the capacity of President of Morbi Mati Uttpadan Sahkari Mandali Limited and after the inquiry, the FIR has been registered. It is further submitted that the society has purchased the land from Accused No.1 Vijay Mansukhlal Mehta; agreement of sale was executed on 18.04.1987; payments were made by cheque and the Accused No.1 has executed one Power of Attorney in favour of one Natubhai Haribhai Patel and the said person has executed sale deed on 3.8.2002 in favour of the society; the society has filed Special Civil Suit No.21 of 2004 and on the application for interim relief, the trial court granted injunction in favour of the society. The aforesaid suit is transferred and pending in Vankaner Court and the same is renumbered as Regular Civil Suit No.242 of 2006. It is also submitted that the name of the Accused No.1 is continued in the revenue record. It is further submitted that the applicant No.1 has purchased the disputed land from the accused No.1 during the pendency of the suit filed by the society against the accused No.1 and the applicant No.2 is the signatory of the sale deed. The complainant is claiming right over the land on the basis of the sale deed executed in favour of the society through the power of attorney. It is further submitted that the said civil suit filed by the society claiming right over the land in question on the basis of registered sale deed, then there was no question of filing the civil suit. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid civil suit, the accused No.1 has already filed a counter-claim, because before execution of the sale deed, the power of attorney was cancelled by the seller. It is submitted that the FIR has been lodged by the complainant merely to pressurize the accused to withdraw the counter-claim. It is further submitted that the dispute is of civil nature and the civil proceedings are already filed by the complainant and the civil suit is pending. It is further submitted that the applicant No.1 -purchaser has reversed the transaction in favour of the seller -accused No.1 and the status-quo granted by the Civil Court has been restored. It is further submitted that the accused No.1 is released on regular bail and quashing petition has been filed by the accused No.1 wherein he is protected.

(3.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence.