SMT. DANO Vs. SHANER LAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT . Dano, who had filed a complaint against Shanker Lal and others, has con le up in revision against the order dt. 2 -3 -1970 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Sadar Chhata, Mathura, discharging the accused Shanker Lal after upholding the objection raised by him that the complaint filed by Smt. Dano was barred b ' Section 195(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) ON 27 -7 -1968, Smt. Dano, wife of Thakuri, instituted a complaint Under Section 419/465/468/149 IPC against Shanker Lal and others alleging that she was a share holder in the house mentioned in the complaint along with her brothers, Natthi and Ram Prasad, mother Smt. Kokila and sister Smt. Jagalo Nathi became addict to wine and gambling etc. and in order to procure money for satisfying his desires, he without the consent of the complainant mortgaged the 'house with Parshottam. When Natthi could not repay the loan Shanker Lal obtained a sale deed dated 1 -8 -1963 from him and 'others. This sale deed is said to have been executed, amongst others by Smt. Dano also. According to the complainant, she never executed the said sale deed. The accused persons got the sale deed registered by putting up before the Registrar some fictitious person in place of the complainant. In the circumstances, the accused persons were guilty of various offences mentioned above. After taking cognizance, the Magistrate summoned the accused persons fur offences Under Sections 419 and 405 IPC.

(3.) THE accused Shanker Lal moved an application before the Judicial Magistrate, Sadar contending that as the sale deed in question had been produced by Smt. Dano in civil suit No. 96 of 1968, instituted by her, as a party to those proceedings and the same had also been used in execution proceedings No. 300 of 1967, no complaint with regard to it could be filed without observing the provisions of Section 476 Code of Criminal Procedure. According to him, in view of the provisions of Section 195(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cognizance of the offence could not be taken on the basis of the complaint made by Smt. Dano. Along with his application Shanker Lal filed certain documents which indicated that the sa'e deed in dispute had been used by the parties to the execution, case No. 300 of 1967 and suit No. 96 of 1968.