BUDHALAL CHHOTALAL RANA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicants - original accused have filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing and setting aside the private complaint filed by the opponent No. 2 -original complainant before the Chief judicial Magistrate, Nadiad (for short Trial court') which is registered as Criminal Case no. 382 of 1996 and charge-sheet filed on 13. 02. 1996 and further orders / proceedings of the said Criminal Case No. 382 of 1996 pending before the Trial Court.

(2.) THIS Court has issued rule on 26. 11. 2002 and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly, the nature of the disputes and the age of the petitioner No. 2 who was aged about 83 years and was suffering from paralysis and was totally bed-ridden and at the verge of death, was also dragged into litigation by the complainant, ad-interim relief was granted in terms of paragraph 6 (c) of the petition whereby further proceedings of Criminal Case No. 382 of 1996 pending before the Chief Judicial magistrate, Nadiad were stayed. The said ad-interim relief which was later on made interim relief and was continued till the final disposal of this petition.

(3.) MR. Satyen B. Raval, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the original complainant is the real sister of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and civil dispute between the parties was pending and mainly one of the point in issues is the contention of the petitioner No. 1 that the original complainant is occupying the suit property on the leave and license basis. He has further submitted that Special Civil Suit no. 12 of 1995 having been dismissed by the trial Court, First Appeal No. 1802 of 1997 is pending before this Court. During the course of the said suit before the Trial court, the parties adduced their respective evidence in the shape of documents and oral testimony and with respect to the particular piece of evidence i. e. Mark 4/2, the original complainant has filed impugned private complaint. It was the say of the original complainant in the complaint that during the course of the trial of the suit, the petitioners have allegedly created false evidence with knowledge to support the cause of the suit and with a view to cause wrongful loss to the rights of the complainant. On institution of the complaint before the learned Chief Judicial magistrate, Nadiad, he ordered investigation under Section 156 (3) of the code of Criminal Procedure and pursuant to it, the police investigated the case and submitted charge-sheet along with the report on 13. 02. 1996. The learned Chief judicial Magistrate has taken the cognizance of the criminal complaint and further proceedings of the criminal case were being conducted in the Trial Court. The petitioners are challenging the action of the Trial Court of taking cognizance of the case and also the complaint and further proceedings as the same are in flagrant violation of provisions of the Code of criminal Procedure and hence, the complaint, charge-sheet and further proceedings are required to be quashed and set aside.