RAMESHWAR S/O BIRDICHAND MUNOT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH POLICE INSPECTOR, RAMANAND POLICE STATION, JALGAON, TALUKA & DIST JALGAON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the three proceedings are filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the relief of quashing of F.I.R.No.27/2015 dated 17-2-2015 registered in Ramanand Police Station Jalgaon for offences punishable under sections 420, 120-B, 406, 34 etc. of Indian Penal Code. It appears that initially one officer of the Revenue Department, office of Land Records, was also made accused. This Court allowed the proceeding filed by the said officer Ashok Damdu Chavan and the F.I.R. filed against him is quashed and set aside. Charge-sheet is filed against remaining six accused persons.

(2.) F.I.R. was given by Chandrashekhar Mantri, resident of Jalgaon. It is his contention that his wife Shital had purchased Survey Nos.311/1A, 311/1B and 311/1K from Rameshkumar Munot, resident of Jalgaon under sale deed dated 2-5-2013. It is contended that on Survey No.311/1A there were 5 plots and on southern side of these plots, there was D.P. road of the width of 18 meters and beyond that railway line was shown. It is contended that considering the area sold in the sale deed his wife was expecting that under the sale deed she would get right to enjoy the entire portion shown in the sale deed. It is contended that afterwards they realised that the aforesaid D.P. road of width of 18 meters shown in development plan was not of the width of 18 meters but it was of the width of 12 meters and immediately after that there was railway compound wall. It is the contention of the complainant side that as the width of the D.P. road is less by 6 meters she cannot enjoy the entire portion shown to be sold to the complainant side and they will be required to give away the portion having width of 6 meters area from all the five plots. It is contended that to ascertain this position the land was got measured through survey office and the survey map was shown to the vendor Munot. It is contended that he contacted Khandesh Builders also as the property had come to Munot from Khandesh Builders but they gave evasive answers. It is contended that due to their approach and as he wanted to dispose of the plots he got corrected area of the disputed 5 plots from Survey No.311/1A to show that the DP road having width of 18 meters was left.

(3.) It is the contention of the complainant side that he approached Munot and Khandesh Builders with the aforesaid grievance and requested them to return the money in respect of the less area but they gave threats to him and refused to return money. After that he gave report to police.