AMARENDRA NARAYAN CHAUDHARI, S/O LATE SUHRIDYA NARAYAN CHAUDHARI, RESIDENT OF SLUM 100, KANKARBAGH, P.S. Vs. GOVIND JHA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application under Sec. 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (For short 'Cr. P.C.') seeking leave to appeal has been filed by one Amrenedra Narayan Chaudhari, one of the witnesses of the original complaint case. He has filed the present application because of the death of the original complainant, who died on 28.09.2013. He was the father of the petitioner of the present case. The leave to appeal has been sought for against the order of acquittal dated 17.05.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Patna under Sections 323, 342, 379, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code in Complaint Case No. 1386(c)/2001 corresponding to Tr. No. 1507/2010.

(2.) According to the complainant, opposite party no. 3 Gulam Dhuniya instigated by opposite party no. 1 Govind Jha and opposite party no. 2 Shankar Jha forcibly occupied the land of the complainant in his village and constructed his house. The total area of the land forcibly occupied by accused Gulam Dhuniya was about 16 dhurs belonging to Khata No. 420, Khesra No. 872. The complainant has further stated that when he protested against construction, the opposite party no. 1 Govind Jha and the opposite party no. 2 Shankar Jha suggested him to sell the constructed part of the land to opposite party no. 3 Gulam Dhuniya for which the complainant agreed. It was also agreed upon that in lieu of such deal the complainant had to give 4 dhurs of land as commission to the accused Govind Jha and Shankar Jha from the same part of land. As per the agreement, the accused Gulam Dhuniya bought 4 dhurs land in the name of his two sons for Rs. 56000.00. As the full and final payment was not made, the complainant did not hand over the sale deed. The complainant has further stated that it was agreed upon that the remaining amount of money will be paid by June, 2000. After the end of June, 2000 when the complainant inquired about the payment of the remaining amount of money, the accused Gulam Dhuniya told him that he had already paid the entire due amount to Govind Jha. When the complainant enquires about the same from Govind Jha, he abused him using filthy language. Thereafter, a panchayati was convened in which the accused persons agreed to pay the remaining amount of money by 30.04.2001. The complainant has further stated that when all his efforts went in vain, he sent a legal notice in June, 2001. Thereafter, once again, a panchayati was convened in which the accused persons assured the complainant that the due amount of money would be paid to him. The complainant has further stated that on 25.07.2001 at about 8:00 p.m. in the night, the accused persons came to his house and stayed there for the whole night. On 28.07.2001, at about 5:30 a.m., the accused persons demonstrated the currency notes which they had brought for the payment to the original complainant and demanded the sale deed. The moment the complainant took out the sale deed from his bag, Govind Jha and Gulam Dhuniya caught the complainant and Shankar Jha snatched the bag and fled away. When the complainant protested, he was slapped by Govind Jha and was thrashed by Gulam Dhuniya causing injuries to the head and waist of the complainant.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, Complaint Case No. 1386 (c)/2001 was registered under Sections 323, 342, 379, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.