JAI PRAKASH SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sheshardri, learned counsel for the applicant nos. 1 and 2, Sri Dilip Kumar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri D. R. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant nos. 3 to 6, Sri Anil Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Gaurav Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Sri B. A. Khan, learned A. G. A. for the State.

(2.) The present application u/s 482 Cr. P. C . has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 29. 3. 2013 filed by the Police in Case Crime No. 32-A of 2011, under Sections 420 , 467 , 468 , 471 , 302 and 120-B IPC, P. S. Anupshahar, District Buland Shahar as well as the impugned order dated 2. 4. 2013 passed by the learned C. J. M. , Buland Shahar in Misc. Case No. 1354 of 2011 as well as the entire proceeding of Case Crime No. 1354 of 2011.

(3.) The facts of this case as mentioned in the affidavit in brief are that accused-applicant no. 1, Jai Prakash Sharma, had lodged an F. I. R. against opposite party no. 2, Parmanand and his son Lalit and two unknown persons on 27. 1. 2011 at 14:45 hours at P. S. Anupshahar, District Bulandshahar, which was registered as Case Crime No. 32 of 2011, under Section 302 / 34 IPC, in which it was mentioned that on 27. 1. 2011, when he was present in his house his father's Bua Smt. Anaro Devi was knitting a sweater in house, her devar- Parmanand and his son Lalit along with two unknown persons came on a motor-cycle and sitting by her side, started talking in respect of land, which fell in the share of Bua Ji. Bua Ji said that she would not give her land to him and further stated that after selling her land, she would get a school built in the name of her husband. In the meantime, opposite party no. 2 exhorted Lalit that they had failed to convince her, hence, she should be shot dead. At this, Lalit took out pistol from his waist and made fire at the temple of Bua Ji of the accused applicant no. 1. At that time, Pramod and Manish Kumar were there, who had seen the occurrence. The investigation was held in the said case and opposite party no. 2 and his son were sent to jail. Thereafter, a frivolous and futile attempt, in order to build a cross case/cross version of the incident dated 27. 1. 2011, was made and an application under Section 156(3) Cr. P. C. was moved by Smt. Mithilesh Sharma (wife of opposite party no. 2) in the court of C. J. M. , Buland Shahar, in which she mentioned that her Jethani Smt. Anaro Devi, wife of late Raj Pal Sharma, aged about 70 years, was mentally weak. The son of brother of her Jethani, Jai Prakash Sharma, (accused-applicant no. 1) wanted to grab property of her Jethani, which was being opposed by her as well as her husband and because of this reason he could not succeed in his aim and was harbouring enmity towards her family and had already given threats for getting them implicated in a false case which were being ignored. Few days ago, her Jethani Smt. Anaro Devi had gone to her mother's village, Jarajpur, in the house of accused-applicant no. 1, Jai Prakash, then on 27. 1. 2011, he (applicant no. 1) committed murder of her Jethani Anaro Devi in his house after getting a will deed executed in his favour so as to grab the property of Smt. Anaro Devi and got an F. I. R. lodged against her husband, Parmanand and her son Lalit at P. S. Anupshahar. After registration of the said F. I. R. , police of the P. S. Anupshahar was harassing her husband and her son, although they had nothing to do with the said occurrence. After coming to know of this occurrence, on the next date i. e. on 28. 1. 2011, she had given an application at P. S. , Anupshahar, for lodging report and when the same was not lodged, she gave an application on 2. 2. 2011 to S. S. P. , Bulandshahar by registered post but her report could not be lodged and hence she prayed that the real culprits should be brought to book. The said application was rejected by C. J. M. vide order dated 17. 3. 2011 recording in order that a report was received from the P. S. Anupshahar to the effect that in the same matter, against husband of Smt. Mithilesh and her son, Crime No. 32 of 2011, under Section 302 IPC has been registered on the basis of which the said accused were detained in prison and that in the said matter investigation was going on concerning murder of Smt. Anaro Devi, while in an application given by Smt. Mithilesh Kumari, also a prayer is made for registration of the case in respect of conducting investigation pertaining to murder of Anaro Devi, therefore, in the same matter there was no need to register two F. I. R. s and, accordingly, application was dismissed. Thereafter, opposite party no. 2 was enlarged on bail by this Court in Crime No. 32 of 2011, whereafter he moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr. P. C. again whereon C. J. M. , Bulandshahar passed order dated 19. 9. 2011 allowing the said application and directing registration of the case, copy of the said order is annexed at page 58 of the paper book in which it has been recorded that according to a report received from the P. S. , real Bhabhi of opposite party no. 2, Smt. Anaro Devi, was issue less and had inherited lot of agricultural land from her husband. Manish Kumar, accused-applicant no. 2, his son Manoj (accused-applicant no. 3), Jai Prakash (accused-applicant no. 1), Pramod (accused-applicant no. 4), were looking for an opportunity to grab the said property. In the month of August, 2010, accused applicant no. 2, Manish Kumar and his son had taken away Bhabhi of opposite party no. 2, Anaro Devi, on the pretext that she should be allowed to stay with them for sometime. On 27. 1. 2011, in the afternoon at about 2:00 pm, a phone-call was received by him from the side of brother of Manish, namely Umesh informing that few moments ago, Smt. Anaro Devi had been shot dead by someone. After receiving the said information, he along with his son, Lalit, reached house of Manish Kumar (accused-applicant no. 2), where he found dead body lying of Anaro Devi, who had been shot at her left temple. Jai Prakash Sharma (accused-applicant no. 1) is a counsel by profession, who in collusion with the police of P. S. , Anupshahar, had lodged a false report against him (opposite party no. 2) and his son, which was registered as Crime No. 32 of 2011, under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, at P. S. Anupshahar. In that case, after getting himself bailed out, when he (opposite party no. 2) obtained papers relating to the agricultural land of the deceased, he came to know that the accused-applicants in order to grab the entire property of Anaro Devi, had got registered a will deed executed on 18. 9. 2013 at Tehsil Anupshahar. Taking into consideration these facts, the said application was allowed vide order dated 19. 9. 2011 directing S. H. O. , P. S. , Anupshahar, to register and investigate the case.