PRITI SUREKHA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "CrPC") was preferred by the petitioner for quashing of the proceeding being GR.Case No. 1939 of 2011 arising out of Kolkata Leather Complex Police Station (hereinafter referred to as the said "police station" only) Case No. 87 dated 14th June, 2011 under Sections 420/406/120B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "IPC").

(2.) The aforesaid police station case was registered pursuant to an application under Section 156 (3) of CrPC preferred at the instance of the defacto complainant / opposite party No.2 before the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (hereinafter referred to as ACJM or the "learned Magistrate"), Baruipur, South 24 Parganas. The learned Magistrate on being satisfied with the allegations and the contentions advanced in the said application under Section 156 (3) of CrPC was pleased to direct the Officer-in-Charge of the said police station to register a case and investigate into the allegations made in the petition of complaint, treating the same as FIR.

(3.) The allegations made in the application under Section 156 (3) of CrPC were to the effect that the defacto complaint / opposite party No.2 entered into an agreement for sale on or about 25th November, 2010 with the accused persons for the purpose of purchasing a plot of land measuring about 25 cottahs situated at Mouza Kulberia, JL No. 7, RS No. 190, RS Khatian No. 541, LR.Katian No. 2953, 2954, 2955, 2956, 2957, 2958 & 2959, Hal Dag No. 586 and the character of the said land was described as 'Sali'. It was categorically stated on oath that the said land was free from all encumbrances and the defacto complainant on being satisfied with the representations made, entered into an agreement with seven vendors. It was alleged that four of the vendors illegally executed a deed of sale on or about 19th May, 2011 and the same was registered in the office of the Registrar of Assurance-I, Kolkata. The defacto complainant was apprehensive of such illegal act of the accused persons and accordingly informed the same to the Officer-in-Charge of the said police station vide GD No. 1213 dated 29th April, 2011, but no action was taken by the said police station inspite of the information being received by them. The defacto complainant further alleged that the accused persons accepted a sum of Rs. 4 lacs at the time of agreement for sale by way of advance and agreed that rest of the amount were to be paid within 9 months from the date of the execution of the agreement for sale. It was further alleged that the accused persons by accepting huge amount of money from third parties namely, Smt. Rakhi Surekha, Smt. Politi Surekha and Smt. Puspa Devi Surekha transferred the property illegally inspite of accepting a sum of Rs. 4 lacs from the defacto complainant. Being dissatisfied by the manner in which, the execution of the sale took place, the defacto complainant preferred an application under Section 144 (2) of CrPC and also a suit for declaration and injunction in respect of the said plot of land before the Civil Court (Junior Division) at Alipore. The learned Civil Court, after being satisfied with the contentions, passed an interim order of injunction to maintain status quo by both the parties till 12th June, 2011. The accused persons, even after knowing such an order of injunction, disobeyed the same and with an ulterior motive executed the deed of sale in favour of the aforesaid third parties. The defacto complainant finally contended that the act and conduct of the accused persons have made them liable for commission of offences punishable under Sections 420/406/120B of IPC.