MANIK Vs. CHANDRABHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached to this Court since the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 03/05/2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambajogai in Criminal Revision No. 9/1999, whereby the learned revisional Court allowed the Revision filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and thereby set aside the order dated 30/12/1997 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kaij, district Beed in R.C.C. No. 368/1990, framing Charge u/s. 468 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code against them. Heard Mr. S.J. Salunke, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. B.A. Darak, the learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and Mr. D.R. Kale, the learned A.P.P. for respondent No. 5 - State.

(2.) During the pendency of the present Writ Petition, respondent No. 2 Narhari S/o. Ginandeo Sirsat and respondent No. 4 Ashruba Bhikaji Shirsat were dead and, therefore, the proceedings against them were ordered to be abated as per order passed by this Court on 23/01/2003. Respondent No. 3 though served, is not represented by any Advocate.

(3.) The petitioner filed Private Complaint, thereby alleging property agricultural field S. No. 76/2/1 to be originally belonging to his father Shankar Narayan. On 12/08/1986, there was partition on stamp paper of Rs. 5/- and according to the said partition, said agricultural field was allotted to the share of complainant/petitioner. It is further alleged that respondent No. 1/accused No. 1 with an ill intention in collusion with accused No. 2 Narhari and accused No. 3 Ashruba, prepared bogus and fabricated sale deed, which was duly registered with the Sub Registrar at Day Book No. 947/86. According to the petitioner/complainant, at no point of time such sale deed was executed and thereby they committed offence punishable u/s. 420, 465, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code.