HARESHBHAI JAYANTILAL THAKKAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filling the present application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants prayed for quashment of the First Information Report (FIR) bearing Crime Register No.I-187 of 2012 registered on 10.10.2012 with Deesa City police station, District Banaskantha. The said FIR was in respect of the offences under sections 463, 464, 465, 467, 468, 470, 471, 420, 120B and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(2.) The first informant-respondent No.2 herein stated in his complaint inter alia that the accused No.1- applicant No.1 herein had instituted Special Civil Suit No. 18 of 2017 before the civil court at Deesa, against the complainant as well as one Patel Kalabhai Dharmabhai and others. It was alleged that in the said suit proceedings, along with others, the plaintiff had produced two agreements to sell in respect of agricultural land, out of which agreement dated 14.07.2015 showed the first informant to be the vendor. It was alleged that no such agreement to sell dated 14.07.2005 was executed by the first informant, nor by said Kalabhai Dharmbhai Patel and that neither of them had signed any such document. It was claimed that no amount of consideration was received. In the First Information Report, in all 11 accused were named. It was further inter alia alleged that accused No.4 who was a Notary Public, notarised the document in absence of the applicants and that the other applicant accused who were advocate by profession, gave wrong identification.

(3.) It appears from the contents of the allegations in the FIR and the facts pleaded in the application that one Kanbi Kalabhai Rajabhai and other persons were the owners of certain agricultural land situated at Moti Mahudi, Taluka Dantiwada, District Banaskantha. Their lands were acquired by the government for the Sipu Irrigation Project. The owners-the land losers were to be compensated by the state government. It appears that the original owners-the land losers executed six different agreements to sell in favour of the first informant-the respondent No.2 and his partner Patel Kalabhai Dharmabhai. The agreement to sell was executed on 28.12.2004 as well as on 16.05.2005 for total consideration of Rs. 8,22,000/- The respondent No.2 and his partner failed to fulfil terms of the agreements and could not arrange the funds towards consideration within time. It is the case of the applicants that they approached the applicant No.1 and thereupon agreed to execute agreement to sell in favour of the applicant No.1 in respect of the very parcels of lands. Out of the total land admeasuring 30 acres and 22 gunthas, the lands admeasuring 20 acres and 12 gunthas were agreed to be sold to applicant NO.1. The state government allotted 31 acres and 18 gunthas of land in favour of the original owners-land losers. It is the case of the applicants that the land-losers fulfilled their part of performance by giving Power of Attorney to respondent No.2-his partner Kalabhai Dharmabhai Patel empowering them to sell, transfer or alienate the agricultural lands allotted to the land losers. Respondent No.2 and his partner did not fulfil their responsibility with regard to the agreement to sell subsequently executed in favour of applicant No.1.