LAGAN SINGH Vs. KHADER SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This reference has been made to this Court by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Deoria, and arises out of the following circumstances:

(2.) Lagan Singh, applicant, was alleged to have executed a sale deed on 19th Feb., 1965 of some land in favour of Khedan Singh and Mahajan Singh, opposite parties nos. 1 and 2. The alleged sale deed of Lagan Singh was registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Hata. According to Lagan Singh he had never executed any sale deed in favour of Khedan Singh and Mahajan Singh on 19th Feb., 1965 and, therefore, he filed a complaint against Khedan Singh, Mahajan Singh and five other persons on 22nd Feb., 1966 and specifically stated in his complaint that the alleged sale-deed dated 19th Feb., 1965 was a forged document and it was never executed by him and that he has never put his thumb impression on it. Lagan Singh's further allegation was that Khedan Singh and Mahajan Singh had, in fact, somehow managed to get the sale deed registered by getting it presented before the Sub-Registrar, Hata, by some person who posed himself to be Lagan Singh. His further allegation was that Jhaboo accused was the person who had got the sale deed presented before the Sub-Registrar by false impression, The remaining accused were alleged to have been in conspiracy in the registration of the sale-deed.

(3.) When the complaint filed by Lagan Singh was being tried by the learned Honorary Special Magistrate, Kasia in Criminal Case No. 119/9 under Sections 465/100/419 of the Indian Penal Code. Lagan Singh made an application for summoning Register N. 8 from the office of the Sub-Registrar, Hata, in order to prove that the alleged sale deed dated 19th Feb., 1965 had not been presented by him before the Sub-Registrar and that in fact Jhaboo accused had identified the person posing as Lagan Singh in the office of the Sub-Registrar and as such was responsible for forgery. The learned Honorary Magistrate summoned Register No. 8, accordingly, and Om Prakash Khare, P. W. 4 produced that register before the learned Magistrate but claimed privilege in respect of that register under Sec. 123 of the Evidence Act. He also informed the learned Magistrate that the District Registrar, who was the head of his office at Gorakhpur had not given his permission to give any evidence on the basis of that register. In fact Om Prakash Khare P. W. 4 quoted the following order of the District Registrar, Gorakhpur in his deposition :