DILIPSINH HIMATSINH SISODIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under Sec. 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants - original accused, seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying for quashment of the FIR being C.R.No.I- 48/2014 registered with Himmatnagar Rural Police Station, Dist. Sabarkantha for the offences punishable under Ss. 406 , 420 , 464 , 465 , 468 , 471 and 114 of IPC. After completion of investigation chargesheet came to be filed against the accused. The filing of the chargesheet culminated in Criminal Case No.2855/2017, which is pending before the 2 nd Judicial Magistrate First Class, Himmatnagar.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this application is that, pursuant to the land acquisition proceedings and to implement the rehabilitation scheme, the State Government allotted the plots to the affected persons whose land acquired for irrigation purpose. The plots were allotted subject to conditions mentioned in the allotment order. One Raval Babu Girdhar was allotted plot No.13 for which, necessary Sanad (allotment order) had been issued by the State Government. Admittedly, allottee Raval Babu Girdhar was died on 27/9/1983 and death certificate to this effect also issued by Panchayat office. In such circumstances, during the revenue proceedings, the scam was unearth and it was revealed that under the name of dead person, allotment of plot was made and the Sanad issued, whereby, the officers and others have committed the offence of criminal breach of trust, cheating, created false document for the purpose of forgery and fraudulently uses a forged documents as genuine for the purpose of getting government land. The Deputy Mamlatdar had filed the complaint for the offences as referred above. During the investigation, it was revealed that the present accused No.1 Dilipsinh Sisodiya vide registered sale deed dtd. 7/2/2000 purchased the plot No.13 from deceased Raval Babu Girdhar, whereas, the accused No.2 Bharatsinh Kumpavat had identified the seller Raval Babu Girdhar and was witnesses of the alleged sale deed. In such circumstances, the chargesheet came to be filed against the accused alleging that in order to get the benefit of Government land, false and bogus sale deed alleged to have been executed despite the fact that the seller was died in the year 1983, whereby, the accused have committed the offence as referred above.

(3.) This Court has heard Mr. Kumar Trivedi for the applicants.