GOVIND SINGH SISODIYA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two applications under section 482 of Cr.P.C., 1973 have been filed for quashing the F.I.R. in Crime No. 512/2013 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Distt. Tikamgarh, for offence under Sections 420, 46, 468 and 471 of I.P.C.

(2.) The necessary facts for the disposal of the present applications in short are that the applicants are practicing Lawyers. The applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya, claims himself to be having a long standing of 39 years of active practice in the Bar, whereas the applicant Ramcharan, Claims himself to be the Associate Advocate of Govind Singh Sisodiya.

(3.) According to the prosecution case, the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya, purchased land bearing Khasra No. 215/882 area admeasuring 1.619 hectares (In short will be referred as disputed property) from one Mohan Kachhi vide registered sale deed dated 22-6-1996. After execution of said sale deed, a correction deed was also executed on 24-2-1997 mentioning therein that inadvertently the complete Khasra Number was not mentioned in the sale deed dated 22-6-1996 and the same may be read as Khasra No.215/882/2. The applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya claims himself to be a bonafide purchaser of the disputed property. The complainant Bhagirath Tiwari, is the resident of Tikamgarh and according to the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya, he was closely associated with a political personality Bhaiya Raja @ Ashok Veer Vikram Singh. The complainant had misappropriated an amount of Rs. 1.5 lacs of Bhaiya Raja and fled away and started living in village Chhidari along with his maternal uncle Mathura Prasad Dixit. Later on, he projected himself to be a member of the gang of Dacoit Chittar Singh and expressed his inclination to surrender before the police authorities. After near about 6 years, he submitted an affidavit claiming himself to be a surrendered dacoit of the gang of Chittar Singh and claimed allotment of 15 acres of land from Collector, Tikamgarh, as per the policy formulated by the State Govt. for the rehabilitation of the dacoits who have surrendered. Accordingly on 30-3-1993, the Collector Tikamgarh allotted 6.110 hectares of agricultural land to the complainant Bhagirath Tiwari including the disputed property. An allotment order dated 13-3-1993 was also issued by the Tahsildar in favour of the complainant. It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya that on 23-1- 2016, the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya has made a complaint to the senior police officers, that the complainant has wrongly claimed himself to be a surrendered dacoit and has wrongly got 15 acres of land allotted under the policy formulated by the State Govt. for the rehabilitation of the dacoits. However, it is claimed that the said complaint was not properly investigated/enquired by the police authorities. It is further submitted that various litigation are pending to the effect that whether the land purchased by the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya is a part of the land allotted to the complainant Bhagirath or not? The Tahsildar mutated the name of the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya in the revenue record, which was challenged by the complainant Bhagirath and the appeal was allowed and at present the revision filed by the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya before the Board of Revenue is pending. It is further submitted that the complainant Bhagirath Tiwari has made a false allegation that the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya, on the basis of the forged resolution purportedly passed by the Gram Sabha, got his name mutated in the revenue records after tempering the revenue documents. It is further submitted that the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya is a bonafide purchaser and believing the version of the seller Mohan Kachhi, he had purchased the land in question. Before registration of the Sale deed, it was obligatory on the part of the Sub-Registrar to verify the title of the seller and once the Sub-Registrar had registered the sale deed, then the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya was under a bonafide impression that he has rightly purchased the disputed property. It is further submitted that the police after concluding the investigation, has filed a charge sheet and on the date of filing of the present application, charges were not framed and the case is pending as Sessions Trial No.167/2017 in the Court of A.S.J., Tikamgarh. In nutshell, it is the contention of the applicant that the complainant Bhagirath, by playing fraud has got 15 acres of land allotted under the scheme formulated by the State Govt. for rehabilitation of the dacoits. However, it was admitted by the Counsel for the applicant Govind Singh Sisodiya that the allotment order in favour of the complainant is still in existence and has not been set aside and except the oral submissions of the applicant that the complainant had obtained the allotment of the land by playing fraud, there is nothing to substantiate the said submission. It is further admitted that the land in question was allotted to the complainant prior to the sale deed and thus, it is clear that Mohan Kachhi was not the owner of the disputed property.