SURESH PATIL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been preferred by the applicant against the order dated 30.11.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Burhanpur in ST No.154/2009, whereby the charges of offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 420 and 409 of IPC were framed against the applicant.

(2.) The brief facts of the case relating to the present revision are that being a partner in a partnership firm "M/s Shree Shai Developers" the applicant obtained some property to be mortgaged before the bank to get some loan for the firm, and therefore with the help of co-accused Smt. Sushma Pathak the property was mortgaged and a loan of Rs.40 lakhs was obtained on that property. Actually the property was not solely owned by Smt. Sushma Pathak , but Smt. Tara Bai and other persons were coowners of the property, who were not informed about that mortgage. When they knew about that fact, Smt. Tara Bai with the help of complainant Mamta Agnihotri had lodged an FIR before the concerned police and after due investigation a charge sheet was filed against the applicant and other co-accused persons.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.