SURGI DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE entire dispute giving rise to the filing of the complaint case no. 2169(C) of 2003 by the complainant fvlurli Dhar Pandey centres around execution of a sale deed by one Kharagdhari Narayan in favour of M/s Suman Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Samiti ') through its Director. The sale deed is with respect to the land pertaining to plot nos. 104, 105, 108 and 87 in Mauza Khemani Chak, district Patna. The total land measures 5 bighas 10 1/2 khatha and a sum of Rs. 1 lac was paid to Kharagdhari. By the aforesaid sale deed the possession of the land was handed over to the Samiti.

(3.) IT is the case of the opposite party no. 2 that Ram Nareshwar Prasad, son of Kharagdhari, received Rs. 16,22,500.00 and Ram Chandeshwar Prasad received Rs. 11,25,725.00 as consideration amount against the said land and they executed a Izabnama on 13.3.1999 and 26.12.2000 respectively in favour of the said Samiti. Surgi Devi (petitioner no. 1) is said to have also received money through cheque in lieu of the aforesaid land. The case of opposite party no. 2 is that they came in possession of the said land and allotted the plots to the 'members of the Samiti. On 3.5.2003 and 16.5.2003 it is alleged when the members of the Samiti went to demarcate their lands, then Ram Chandeshwar Prasad and other persons armed with pistol and lathi started creating nuisance and threatened the complainant Murlidhar Pandey and demanded a rangdari of Rs. 1 lac for which a, complaint case was filed numbered as 1125(C) of 2003 under sections 386, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. It is also alleged that accused persons of this case demolished the pillars constructed by the members of the Samiti and tried to capture the lands. It may be mentioned here that the complaint case was sent for investigation under sec. 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the Phulwarisharif, Gourichawk police station and was registered as Gaurichawk RS. case no. 204 of 2003 dated 7.6.2003.