ISMAILBHAI HATUBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two applications are filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing of criminal proceedings arising out of CR No.I-110 of 2009 (Sessions Case No.351 of 2012). Criminal Misc.Application No.24821 of 2017 is filed by by accused No.3 of the aforesaid offence for quashing of the proceedings as well as challenging the order dated 31.08.2017 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat below application Exh.8 in Sessions Case No.351 of 2012. The said application was filed under Section 227 of the Criminal Procedure Code for discharge in Sessions Case No.351 of 2012. Criminal Misc.Application No.25120 of 2017 is filed for quashing of the proceedings arising out of CR No.I-110 of 2009.

(2.) The FIR came to be registered with Katargam Police Station for offences under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 474, 166, 167, 193, 196, 199, 201, 203, 255, 260, 261, 262 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Pursuant to such FIR, investigation was carried out and charge sheet is filed before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate and the case came to be committed to the Sessions Court being Sessions Case No.351 of 2012. It appears that investigation and filing of the charge sheet has taken place at various stages as and when accused have been arrested during the course of investigation and charge sheets qua them have been filed periodically. In the charge sheet, both the applicants are shown as accused Nos.3 and 4. Out of the two accused, accused No.3 filed application for discharge on 03.12.2012, which came to be rejected by the impugned order. The gist of the FIR is that though Somiben -the original owner of the land bearing revenue survey no. 248/1 located at the above mentioned place in Katargam died on 12/1/99, the accused persons of this case filed Tenancy Case no. 57/01 on 13/4/01 in Tenancy Branch of Agricultural Tribunal without knowledge and consent of the land owners and hearing was held and forged thumb impression and fabricated statements of Late Somiben were produced on 24/7/01. moreover, her statement dated 25/9/01, reply, genealogy and panchkyas were also fabricated. Moreover, the officers have also submitted site inspection report on 25/9/01, wherein forged thumb impressions of Late Somiben have been made. This report has been produced in this case and obtained false orders in collusion. Three stamp papers of Rs. 5/- having same number of 703 were forged/printed and the same were kept under possession and misused the same as genuine and three power of attorney having three different writings were prepared on 8/4/1995 and exchange deed, possession receipt and declaration were also prepared on the same day and bogus seals of 'before me' were affixed and the same were produced in government offices at different places and on various dates. Thereby, the accused persons committed offences in collusion with one another, committed unlawful trespass on valuable land, created their right by getting their names entered into tax receipt unlawfully, usurped the land, got the plan passed in the name of deceased person, carried out unlawful construction and sold our land without our knowledge and consent.

(3.) Learned Advocate for the applicant in Criminal Misc.Application No.24821 of 2017 submitted tat the entire issue is of civil nature and the applicants who were Advocates by profession had merely represented their clients in various proceedings based upon the instructions given by their clients. No criminal intention can be attributed to the applicants as they was merely discharging their duties towards their clients. It is further submitted that from the entire charge sheet, no overt act is attributed to the applicants except for appearing before the authorities in connection with revenue proceedings initiated by accused No.1 in connection with the land in question.