SHUSHILA DEVI Vs. RAM NARESH BHAGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 20.12.1996 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Muzaffarpur, in G.R. No. 731/85, TR No. 87/96, whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted the members of the opposite party for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420 and 423 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) In short the prosecution case is that on 20th March, 1995, the petitioner filed a complaint petition bearing Complaint Case No. 111/95 against the accused persons with reference to the occurrence dated 21.3.1984 to 26.4.1984 for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420 and 423 of the Indian Penal Code stating therein that the father of the petitioner, Jagdish Bhagat have three brothers, namely, Ram Sahay Bhagat, Ram Naresh Bhagat and Ram Pravesh Bhagat, who were living separately after partition. It has been stated that the wife of Jagdish Bhagat died in the life-time of their father and thus, the petitioner is sole heir and legal representative after the death of her father in the year 1976. The petitioner has acquired about 5 bighas land, house and sairat. The opposite-party No. 2, who is the uncle of the petitioner, told the petitioner to execute kebala, but she refused to do so. The opposite-party No. 3 is a minor son of opposite-party No. 1 in whose name opposite-party No. 1 got registered-deed of gift executed by another lady impersonating her and the rest of the accused persons knowingly identified her and became witness on the deed. The deed-writer opposite-party No. 5 has created false documents. On 30.12.1984, the petitioner reached at her house but the opposite-party turned her out. Thereafter, the petitioner rushed to the Registry Office and came to know about the false and created deed of gift and after knowing this fact she organised a panchayati of independent persons, who were also witnesses of the case in which opposite-party No. 2 has accepted his guilt and gave assurance that he would execute the document of ladavi, but he always delayed the matter and on 19.3.1985 the opposite-party No. 2 refused to comply the decision of the panchayati and as such the accused persons have created a false registered-deed of gift in the name of the opposite-party No. 2 with respect to 5 bighas of land.

(3.) The learned Judicial Magistrate forwarded the complaint petition under Section 156(3), Cr PC to the officer-in-charge Town PS, Muzaffarpur for instituting a case and submitting a report after completion of the investigation. Accordingly, Case No. 168/85 under Sections 419, 420 and 423 of the Indian Penal Code was registered and after completion of the investigation charge-sheet under the aforesaid Sections was submitted against the accused persons including the minor son of opposite-party No. 1. Thereafter, cognizance was taken and the trial concluded with the result as stated above.