VITTHALBHAI AMBARAMDAS PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Jigar G. Gadhavi, learned advocate on record for the applicant-original complainant, Mr. Pankaj S. Chaudhary, learned advocate on record for the respondent No.2-original accused and Ms. C.M. Shah, learned APP appearing for the respondent-State.

(2.) This application is filed under Sec. 378(4) of Cr.P.C., 1973, seeking leave to appeal to challenge the judgment and order dtd. 29/4/2019 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Mahesana in Criminal Case No.5712 of 2011. By the said judgment and order, the learned Magistrate has proceeded to record the order of acquittal of respondent No.2-original accused for the offence punishable under Ss. 406 , 465 , 468 , 471 and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Mr. Jigar G. Gadhavi, learned advocate on record for the applicant-original complainant, has invited attention of this Court to the findings and reasons recorded by the trial court. He has further invited attention of this Court to the case of the complainant and has submitted that the dispute pertains to the ancestral property, which is an immovable property bearing plot No.15 originally belonging to the father of the applicant and the respondent No.2 herein. Indisputably, the said property was reflected in the municipal record in the name of the father of the complainant and the respondent No.2-original accused. The father had expired on 11/8/1989. It is the case of the complainant that respondent No.2 had prepared false document, which was in the nature of relinquishment deed dtd. 4/10/2007, thereby it was claimed that the original complainant had relinquished his rights towards the said property in favour of the present respondent No.2, who is also brother of the applicant-original complainant. Construction on the said plot was made in the year-1992. The respondent No.2 had continued in possession of the said property since then. It is further contended by the complainant that in the year- 2009, when he had approached the authority for making the payment of the property tax, he had realized that the property had been transferred in the name of respondent No.2. On further inquiry, the complainant had come across the forged relinquishment deed upon obtaining the copy of such deed, it was found that the stamp paper used, was purchased on 4/10/2007 in the name of his father, who had expired in the year-1989. The said document was notorized almost after two years on 22/6/2009. It is the case of the complainant that he had not appeared before the notary neither he had signed the aforesaid document. The said document was a forged and the fabricated document created by respondent No.2-original accused, which was produced before the authority as genuine document and financial benefit was derived by getting it transferred in his name. Initially the legal notice was addressed to the respondent No.2. The complainant had approached the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, by lodging private complaint on 21/7/2011. The said complaint was registered as Criminal Case No.5712 of 2011 for the offence punishable under Ss. 406 , 465 , 468 , 471 and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code.