MANOJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been filed under Section 397 readwith Section 401 of Cr.P.C. Being aggrieved with the order passed by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption) Act, Indore in special case No.769/2014 on 05/02/2015 whereby the charges under Section 13 (1) (c) readwith Section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 420, 468, 120-B and 201 of IPC has been framed against the petitioner.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Dilip Singh Chouhan made a complaint alleging that Rajendra Jaiswal S/o Ramlal Jaiswal with the connivance of Government Officials on the basis of forged documents and false affidavits has got executed the sale-deeds from Lav-Kush Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha in his favour and also in favour of his wife Smt. Usha Jaiswal and minor daughter Namrata Jaiswal. On inquiry by EOW, it was found that Rajendra hatched the conspiracy with Manoj Kumar, Vice President, Lav-Kush Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha, Laxminarayan, President, Vikas Apartment Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha have got executed the sale-deeds in his favour as well as in favour of his wife and minor daughter, on the basis of forged documents and false affidavits. Sale-deed of Plot No.3 belonging of Lav-Kush Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha got executed in favour of Smt. Usha Jaiswal wife of Rajendra on 26/07/1994. Sale-deed of Plot No.4 belonging of Lav-Kush Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha got executed in favour of Rajendra on 23/08/1995. Sale-deed of plot of No.44 belonging of Lav-Kush Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha got executed in favour of Smt. Usha Jaiswal/wife of Rajendra. Sale-deed of area 373 sq.ft. adjacent to the plot of No.44 belonging of Lav-Kush Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha got executed in favour of Rajendra on 09/09/1995. Sale- deed of plot of No.5 belonging of Lav-Kush Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha got executed in favour of Smt. Usha Jaiswal wife of Rajendra on 09/09/1995. Sale-deed of plot of No.240 belonging of Vikas Apartment Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha, Alok Nagar got executed in favour of Rajendra on 31/03/1995 and Sale-deed of plot of No.241 belonging of Vikas Apartment Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha got executed in favour of Ku. Namrata on 31/03/1995. It was also found that out of the aforesaid plots some plots have been sold to another person. Thus, Manoj Kumar, Upadhyaksh of Paliwal Nagar, Laxminarayan, Adhayaksh of Lav-Kush Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha have not followed the bye-laws of Co-operative Societies and on the basis of forged documents and false affidavits, sold the plots in favour of Rajendra, Smt. Usha Jaiswal/wife of Rajendra and Namrata/daughter of Rajendra causing loss of revenue to the Government Exchequer to the tune of Rs.5,21,000/-. After due investigation charge-sheet has been filed and learned trial Court has framed the charges under Section 13 (1) (c) read with Section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 420, 468, 120-B and 201 of IPC against the petitioner, being aggrieved this revision petition has been preferred.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned trial Court has committed illegality in framing the charges. There is no prima facie evidence against the petitioner. The petitioner has executed the sale-deeds in pursuance of the resolution by the society mentioning that in Village-Khajrana at Paliwal Nagar since 1975 there has been encroachment on the land and despite of the efforts they are unable to remove the encroachment on 21 plots, then, compromise may be entered with such persons, so that they can be removed from the plots encroached. On the basis of compromise between the society and Rajendra Jaiswal who encroached the land of 5 plots were allotted to him with all the value of the plot and sale-deed was executed in favour Rajendra Jaiswal, Smt. Usha Jaiswal/his wife and Ku. Namrata Jaiswal/his daughter. It is submitted that plots allotted to Rajendra Jaiswal and his family were latter on cancelled. It is submitted that M.P. Co- operative Socialites Act provides penal provision under Section 74 and 75 of M.P. Co-operative Socialites Act. It is submitted that no offence under Section 420 of IPC is made out as the intention from the inception is missing from the entire case, hence it is prayed that impugned order be set-aside.