RAM BACHAN YADAV Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) This is an application for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case No. 2628 of 2008, Shiv Kumar Gupta v. Ram Bachan Yadav and Ors. under Sections 384, 504 and 506, I.P.C. pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia.

(3.) A complaint against four accused persons including S.I. Tribhuvan was filed by the Respondent No. 2 before the learned Magistrate. All the accused persons were summoned to face trial but this application under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure was filed by the 3 accused persons only excluding the S.I. Tribhuvan. As per complaint case on the basis of forged agreement to sell, on 10.8.2008, accused person Nos. 1 to 3 {Applicants of present case) came at the door of the house of the complainant at about 4 p.m. they asked to the complainant and his brother that their mother had executed an agreement to sell in their favour of the house 4-5 years ago. They pressed them to vacate the house, so that they may live there. Complainant and his brother tried to inquire about the agreement to sell, they became annoyed and badly abused them and said that if they will not agree to vacate the house, they will come again alongwith muscle men and will oust them from the house forcibly and it they obstruct them, they will be killed. On 11.8.2008, the Applicant moved an application regarding the occurrence at chowki of police station. Chowki Incharge asked Head Constable to all the parties. Accused persons/Applicants were summoned at the chowki and chowki Incharge asked them not to repeat the occurrence. Later on under the conspiracy of incharge of chowki of police station, accused No. 4, again the accused Nos. 1 to 3 were called and complainant and his brother were pressed to sign on two stamp papers forcibly. Under their pressure, although they raised objection but they had signed the papers when the chowki Incharge abused them to face the consequence, if they do not sign the papers. Witnesses who were in their company were also pressed to sign those papers but they refused to sign the papers and later on they agreed to sign only when the photostat copies of the papers is supplied to them. When they agreed to supply the photostat copies, only then they signed those papers and later on copies of the same was supplied to them. Annexing the photostat copies of these papers, this complaint was filed. Complaint case was registered. After recording the statement under Sections 200 and 202, Code of Criminal Procedure learned Magistrate was of the opinion that prima facie case is made out, so accused persons were summoned to face the trial for the offence detailed above. Aggrieved by. this order, this application under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure has been moved.