ANOOP SINGH Vs. HANUMAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both petitions have been filed by the applicants being aggrieved by different proceedings of the complaint filed by the respondent having the common dispute, therefore, both petitions are being decided by this common order.

(2.) Applicants of M.Cr.C. No.6586/2014 have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. whereby the respondents filed a complaint against all the applicants before the Court of JMFC, Satna. The Court of JMFC, Satna vide order dated 29.11.2013 after registering the complaint against each applicants under Sections 467, 471 read with Section 34 and Section 120-B of the IPC and issued the notices to the applicants. Later on, this case committed by the Court of JMFC for trial to the Sessions Court and 2nd Additional Sessions Judge received the complaint and registered as S.T. No. 84/2014 and vide order dated 15.12.2015 framed the charges against the applicants. Applicants Anoop Singh and Pramod Singh have filed Criminal Revision No.247/2016 for quashing of the charges.

(3.) Facts giving rise to these petitions, in short, are that respondent Hanuman Singh is the recorded Bhoomiswami of the land bearing Khasra No.1780/1, area 3.094 hectare, Khasra No. 1803/1, area 0.084 hectare, total area 3.178 hectare situated in Village Mauja Piprikala, Tehsil Uchehra District Satna. He was cultivating the some land and in possession of the land, but applicants conspired each other and created forged papers of sale agreement (un-registered) and on the basis of that unregistered paper of agreement of sale with the collusion of other persons who were posted in the revenue department and lived in village got succeeded in mutation the name of Talendra Pratap Singh in place of respondent Hanuman Singh, then Hanuman Singh filed a civil suit for injunction and declaration of title and also made a report before the Police department. Thereafter, filed a complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. before the Court of JMFC. The Court of JMFC examined the witnesses produced by the complaint. Thereafter, the Court of JMFC vide order dated 29.11.2013, registered the complaint for the offence punishable under Sections 467, 471 read with Section 34 and Section 120-B of the IPC and issued notices to the applicants. The applicants appeared in the complaint. The Court of JMFC is not having a jurisdiction to try the offences, committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Satna after hearing the both parties, vide order dated 15.12.2015 framed the charges of the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 and 474 Part-II of the IPC against Talendra Pratap @ Heeraman Singh, Anoop Singh, Pramod @ Raju Singh, Arunendra Pratap Singh, Shyam Bai Paroha and Ramkhilawan Paroha and proceed for the sessions trial.