SANTOSH RANGNATH KOTALWAR Vs. MANIKRAO APPARAO SHETKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present application has been filed by the original accused persons for quashing and setting aside order of issuance of process against them and quashing and setting aside the complaint filed by the respondent against them. The parties are hereinafter referred to by their nomenclature before the Trial Court.

(2.) Complainant filed a private complaint against the present applicants bearing S. T. C. C. No. 742/2016 before learned J. M. F. C., 4th Court, Udgir, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur contending that he is the member of one Sarvodaya Sah. Gruhnirman Sanstha. Plot No. 41A was allotted to him in the society. He was issued with the form No. 8 by inserting his name in the municipal record. However, some of the persons who were not members of the society took objection regarding the disbursement of the plot to the complainant. The said dispute was raised before District Sub Registrar Co-operative Societies Latur. The said authority did not give an opportunity to the complainant to putforth his say and unilaterally passed an order to cancel the allotment of the said plot to the complainant. Such directions were given to the Administrator of the society. In fact, the district Sub-Registrar had no authority to cancel the disbursement of the plot in favour of the complainant. The complainant had then challenged the said order before Co-operative Court, Nanded. In that case, parties were directed to maintain statusquo by order dated 25.10.2013. However, the accused Nos. 1 to 37 gave false application and information to the Chief Officer, Nagar Parishad, Udgir, on 25.10.2013 and prayed for cancellation of the reservation of plot in the name of the complainant. In fact, no such decision was taken by the society to cancel his membership. Accused Nos. 1 to 37, in conspiracy has given a false application to the Chief Officer, Nagar Parishad, Udgir and on the basis of false information, the accused persons instigated Govt. servant to use their powers in canceling the entry in Form No. 8. In spite of giving knowledge of the incident to police on 11.11.2013, the F. I. R. was not taken and therefore, he had filed the private complaint.

(3.) It appears that after the presentation of the complaint, verification of the complainant was taken and thereafter, after hearing the complainant, the learned Magistrate has held that only prima facie case is made out for issuance of process punishable under Section 182 read with Section 34 of I. P. C. and therefore, the summons was accordingly issued only under that Section. The said order and entire proceeding is under challenge in this application.