JIA LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three revisions can be disposed of by a single judgment, inasmuch as they arise out of a single proceeding.

(2.) JIA Lal, (who is applicant in all these three revisions) filed a complaint on 22-5-61 under Section 447 and certain other sections of the I. P. C. against Allah Bux and Pancham, opposite parties, before the Nyaya Panchayat Pachgain on the allegations that he. was the owner of plot No. 171 situated in village Garni Harnather and that the aforesaid accused had unlawfully constructed their houses thereon. The two accused set up a plea that they had been granted permission by the complainant s mother Smt. Bhagwani Devi to construct their houses for which they had paid due consideration to her Karinda Sheru (opposite party No. 2 in Revision No. 1713 ). In support of their contention they respectively filed ijazatnamas Exts. Kha-1 and Kha-2 said to have been executed by the applicant's mother in their favour. Later on the jurisdiction of the Nyaya Panchayat was quashed with the result that the complaint was transferred to the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Jalesar in whose court as well, the two accused relied upon the alleged ijazatnamai Exts. Kha-1 and Kha-2 said to have been executed in their favour. In support of his case Allah Bux had produced. D. W. Ganga Singh, scribe of Ext. Kha-1, to prove the document. However, Ranna Shah who was the attesting witness of Ext. Kha-1 was not produced.

(3.) LIKEWISE Pancham accused had produced defence witness Triloki who was the attesting witness of his deed Ex. Kha-2. But he did not produce Chandra Sahai, scribe of the document. Both the accused had further produced Sheru opposite party to depose that the said ijazatnamas had been executed in his presence. The learned Magistrate however, accepted the prosecution case, and rejected the defence set up by the accused as false. Regarding the ijazatnamas he recorded a categorical finding that they were forged documents. Accordingly, by his judgment and order dated 24-9-62 the learned Magistrate convicted both the accused Allah Bux and Pancham under Section 447 I. P. C. Two days later i. e. on 26-9-62 Jia Lal, complainant, filed an application before the learned Magistrate praying for taking proceedings under Section 476 Cr. P. C. against the two accused as well as D. Ws. Ganga Singh, Triloki and Sheru and also Chandra Sahai, scribe of Ext. Kha-2 and Ram Sahai attesting witness of Ext. Kha-1 who had not been produced. The allegations in the said application were that all the persons aforesaid had formed a conspiracy and in pursuance thereof had forged Exts. Kha-1 and Kha-2 and had further produced false evidence in court in support thereof. The plea of the persons who were arrayed as opposite parties to the aforesaid application under Section 476 Cr. P. C. was that that Section did not apply to the case and that the complainant's application was barred by Section 479-A Cr. P. C. The learned Judicial Magistrate came to the conclusion that the matter was covered by Section 476 Cr. P. C. and, therefore, directed a complaint to be lodged against seven persons, namely, Allah Bux, Pancham, Triloki, Ganga Singh, Ranna Shah, Chandra Sahai and Sheru the first six being opposite parties in Criminal Revn. No. 1714 of 1963 while Sheru is opposite party No. 2 in Criminal Revision No. 1713 of 1963, the third opposite party being Chandra Sahai, who is opposite party No. 7 in Criminal Revision-No. 1714 of 1963. In Criminal Revision No. 1671 of 1964 the opposite parties are only Allah Bux, Ganga Singh and Runna Shah. Accordingly on 5-3-63 the learned Judicial Magistrate filed a complaint against the aforesaid persons under See Sections 120-B, 193, 196, 467, 471. 420 and 511 read with Section 109. I. P C.