MUKTABAI EKNATH MOTKARI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these applications arise out of the same FIR and therefore they are disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The FIR is lodged on 18/09/2018 pursuant to the order passed by the learned Magistrate u/s 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The original complaint was lodged by one Ramesh Balu Mandlik against one Muktabai Motkari, Bhushan Motkari, Tahesildar Ganesh Rathod and Record Officer Bhagwan Tukaram Sable. Muktabai and Bhushan have preferred Anticipatory Bail Application No.2270/18. Tahesildar Ganesh Rathod has preferred Anticipatory Bail Application No.2203/18 and the Record Officer Bhagwan Sable has preferred Anticipatory Bail Application No.2660/18.

(3.) It is mentioned in the complaint that the dispute is in respect of agricultural land bearing Survey No.28/2, 69/1, 64/1/1, 69/1 Gat No.16 situated at Anandvali within the limits of Municipal Corporation of Nashik. It is mentioned in the complaint that the accused Muktabai claimed to be the sister of the complainant and had made an application for entry in the revenue record. In support of her claim she has submitted the birth extract from the year 1942 mentioning that she was the daughter of one Balu Mandlik. The first informant has obtained copy of such extract by making an application. From such extract he was convinced that the extract was manipulated. There was overwriting and the name was entered in a different ink. According to the first informant such manipulation was possible only with the connivance of Tahesildar and the Record officer. He has further added in his complaint that Muktabai's son Bhima Balu Mandlik was born on 03/01/1952 as per his birth extract. Therefore it was impossible that Muktabai could have been born in the year 1942 as claimed by her. Muktabai had made an application before the Talathi. The Talathi had sought guidance from the Tahesildar and after giving notices to the complainant and others, had made mutation entry in the revenue record and had entered name of Muktabai. According to the first informant, mutation entry was based on the forged birth extract and therefore he filed his complaint before J.M.F.C. Nashik seeking investigation u/s 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The order was passed for such investigation and the FIR was lodged vide C.R.No.281/18 on 18/09/2019 at Sarkarwada Police Station, Nashik, as mentioned earlier.