LAWS(ALL)-2021-11-57

PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Decided On November 18, 2021
PAWAN KUMAR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF U.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

(2.) The instant application under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C.") has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of impugned charge-sheet dated 16/1/2019 as well as cognizance order dated 18/3/2019 in Criminal Case No. 2527 of 2019 (State v. Pawan Kumar) arising out of Case Crime No. 0339 of 2018, under Ss. 420, 467, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code (in short "IPC"), registered at Police Station Kotwali Shahar, District Bulandshahr, pending before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr.

(3.) The First Information Report dated 29/3/2018 under Ss. 420, 467, 468, 471, I.P.C. at Police Station Kotwali Shahr, Bulandshahr, has been lodged by the opposite parties no. 2 and 3 against the applicant and unknown employees of Tehsil, Dadri, stating that the father of the first informants/opposite party nos. 2 and 3 was the owner and recorded tenure holder of agriculture land of Khata No. 986, Gata No. 1578/4 area 0.4680 hectare. After the death of their father they became owner of the aforesaid land on the basis of registered will and are in possession of the said agriculture land, their names have been mutated in the record of rights. The applicant prepared a forged fabricated sale deed dated 30.5.1974/19.6.1974 in the name of his father Ram Chandra from the first informants' father Raghuver Dayal relating to the land of area 1818 sq. yards of Gata No. 1578/4. The applicant replaced the aforesaid sale deed by another sale deed which had been executed by Teekam Singh in favour of Smt. Satyawati Devi wife of Shive Kumar on 30.5.1974 and registered on 19.6.1974 as document no. 1813 Bahi no. 1 Zild no. 994-997 page no. 279/87-88 with the help of the employees of concerned department. The applicant tried to mutate the land of the first informants in his favour on the basis of a forged sale deed. When the first informants came to know about the fake registration of the sale deed, the first information report was lodged.