SADIK AHMED MAKDA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties by video conferencing.

(2.) By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-accused has prayed for bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11210050201120 of 2020 registered with Rander Police Station, District Surat for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(3.) It is the case of the prosecution in the FIR that the complainant is an advocate and does legal practice and that in 2001 the complainant came across the applicant/accused as the applicant was a broker and the complainant had purchased a land thereby which was in the name of the mother of the applicant and since then the complainant knows the applicant well and in September, 2017 the applicant along with co-accused person namely Abdul Khalil Ibrahim had approached the complainant with regard to the property and the applicant had introduced Abdul Khalik Ibrahim and the complainant with each other and stated that the concerned property belongs to Abdul Khalik Ibrahim and informed that the said property is to be sold and thereafter, the complainant had told that he will think over it and let him know and thereby they used to frequently talk about the property for three months and on 6th April, 2017 the applicant had shown the Power of Attorney made by the co-accused and told that the property is to be sold and, therefore, a deal was made for Rs.24,00,000/- and it was decided that a written agreement will be of Rs.4,85,000/- and, therefore, the complainant had issued cheques of different banks to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- and given cash of Rs.85,000/- and the remaining amount of Rs.19,15,000/- was paid in several cash installments .After three months a possession receipt was made and Notarised vide serial no.1900/1818 and on making a demand for sale deed the applicant on 5th April, 2018 gave the complainant a simple write-up stating that the sale deed will be given to the complainant and thereafter the complainant had asked for sale deed, as decided but evasive replies were given and, therefore, the complainant found it fishy and he got records from the City Survey Office and found that the said property has been sold by the co-accused person to one person namely Shaikh Rukhsana Mohammad Yusuf vide registered Sale Deed No.16813 of 2017 dated 19th July, 2017. Subsequently the FIR came to be filed against the accused persons.