JIUT BANDHAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. K. Rastogi, J. This is an application under section 482 Cr. P. C. for quashing the proceedings of criminal case No. 1775 of 2006, State v. Jiut Bandhan, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 506 LP. C. pending in the Court of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 17, Gorakhpur.

(2.) THE facts relevant for disposal of this application are that on 19. 8. 2004 an application under section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. was moved by Brijesh Kumar Tripathi resident of village Chhapia, police station Barhalganj, district Gorakhpur, against Jiut Bandhan and Krishnashraya resident of village Kolhua, police station Barhalganj, district Gorakhpur before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 17, Gorakhpur with these allegations that his father wanted to purchase some land and when accused came to know his this desire they told his father that Jiut Bandhan had 2. 10 Acre land in village Mortal. However, his lather wanted to purchase 1. 06 Acre land only. Ultimately it was decided that sale deed of 1. 06 Acre land shall be executed. Brijesh Kumar paid a sum of Rs. 1,87,000/- to Jiut Bandhan and Jiut Bandhan executed sale deed of 1. 06 Acre land in favour of his father Jhinkoo Prasad Tripathi. However, after execution of the above sale deed, Brijesh Kumar Tripathi came to know that out of total area of 2. 10 Acre land, Jiut Bandhan had already sold 0. 75 Acre land to Mohd. Khalil on 10. 7. 2002 and 0. 60 Acre land to Anwar Ali on 14. 7. 2003 and in this way only an area of 0. 75 Acre of land was lying with Jiut Bandhan and he had fraudulently executed sale deed of 1. 06 Acre land in favour of Jhinkoo Prasad Tripathi and in this way he had realised a sum of Rs. 54,560/- extra. Both the accused had fraudulently sold this land to Jhinkoo Prasad Tripathi though a part of it had already been sold to Mohd. Jalil and Anwar Ali. THE accused were threatening Brijesh Kumar Tripathi and Jhinkoo Prasad to kill them. Jhinkoo Prasad Tripathi went to the police station to lodge a report but his report was not written. He also gave an application to the S. S. P. Gorakhpur but no action was taken and then he filed this application under section 156 (3) Cr. P. C.

(3.) IN this case a statement was made by learned Counsel for the parties on 21. 8. 2007 that the matter has been compromised between the parties. They were directed vide order of the same date to file an application for compromise before the Magistrate and thereafter appear before this Court. A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the applicant enclosing therewith a copy of the application, which has been moved by the parties before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 17, Gorakhpur. It has been stated in this compromise that due to some mistake area of land sold to Jhinkoo Prasad Tripathi was wrongly mentioned as 1. 06 Acres and actually an area of 0. 75 Acre of land only was sold to Jhinkoo Prasad Tripathi. It was also stated in this compromise that the loss suffered by Jhinkoo Prasad Tripathi due to the above error has been compensated.