BRAJESH KUMAR AWASTHI Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

(2.) It is alleged in the prosecution case that the name of his father was registered as the sole owner (????) of the land recorded in CH Form 45 for Gata Nos. 57 and 65, Village Bhadua Tarhar, Gonda, However, his name was not entered in the Khatauni. It was only after a case for correction of the aforesaid error was allowed, the name of his father was entered into the Khatauni for Fasli Year 1381-86. Subsequently, the applicant/accused, in collusion with co-accused and certain Tehsil employees, allegedly tampered with the records and fraudulently added the term "???" after the first informant's father's name. This alteration enabled him to claim that his father, Murlidhar Awasthi, was entitled to half of the property. Following this, Murlidhar Awasthi executed a sale deed in favor of Vimlesh, the applicant's wife. When the first informant tried to pursue legal action regarding the matter, Brijesh Kumar Awasthi and his associates allegedly implicated him in false rape cases, leading to his imprisonment. Upon his acquittal, he started pursuing the aforesaid case all over again.

(3.) It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that the alleged forgery is said to have been committed in the year 1979 and thereafter between the father of the complainant and father of the applicant, a series of litigation took place which have been pleaded in para 9 to 19 of the bail application. These litigation regarding the land in question continued for a period of 26 years. The allegations primarily involve the applicant's late father, and the FIR contains general accusations without specifying the role of any particular accused. The offences are triable by a magistrate. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained criminal history of the applicant in para 27 of the bail application.