NANUA AND OHTERS Vs. STATE AND LACHHAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE reference has been made to this Court by the learned Temporary Sessions Judge, Mathura and arises out of proceedings Under Section 145, Code of Criminal Procedure. Against the same order by which the referring court has made the reference to this Court the Applicants Nanua and others have filed criminal revision No. 1057 of 1969 the reference and the revision have been ordered to be connected by a learned single Judge of this Court and hence they are being disposed of together. As regards the revision it may be stated that since the reference is in favour of Nanua and others the revision filed by them has become infructuous and is dismissed.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the reference which has been made to this Court are that on 26 -4 -1968 Lachman filed a complaint before the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, district Mathura, alleging that he, along with Narain Singh, was in possession of the plots in dispute since 21 -12 -1966 as a result of an agreement to sell the plots to him and Narain Singh executed by Nanua for a sum of Rs. 10,000/ - out of which Rs. 7,000/ - were paid immediately to Nanua who had undertaken to execute the sale deed of the plots in dispute in favour of Lachman and Narain Singh within two years after acquiring Bhumidhari rights in the plots and further alleging that the possession of the plots was also simultaneously given to him and Narain Singh soon after the execution of the agreement to sell. It was further alleged by Lachman that subsequently Nanua, on 8 -4 -1968, dishonestly executed a sale deed in respect of the plots in dispute in favour of Kunwar Sen and Kamla after acquiring Bhumidhari rights in the plots. According to Lachman the possession of the plots had already been delivered to him and Narain Singh under the agreement to sell dated 21 -12 -1966. The subsequent sale deed by Narain in favour of Kunwar Sen and Kamla had no legal effect. Lachman further alleged that on the basis of the fictitious sale deed obtained by Kunwar Sen, Kamla and others from Nanua they had started asserting their possession over the plots in dispute and wanted to forcibly cut away the crops growing on the plots and therefore, there was an apprehension of breach of peace between the parties. It was prayed that proceedings Under Section 145, Code of Criminal Procedure, be instituted against Nanua and others.