LALAN YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the 13 petitioners who figured as accused in Protest Petition No. C1275 of 2004 have prayed for the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of Maharajganj P.S. Case No. 23 of 2003 arising out of complaint case No. 1390 of 2002 including the order dated 10.2.2005 passed by Sri P. Mishra, the then Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class. Siwan, taking cognizance for offences under Sections 465, 467, 468 and 120B, I.P.C.

(2.) Complainant Rajendra Yadav, impleaded herein as O.P. No. 2, filed the aforesaid complaint stating that the land in question before the abolition of the zamindari system had been settled in the name of his ancestors Gulajari Yadav and others by the erstwhile zamindar and the settles came in possession over the said land. The land in question appertains to Khata No. 45/21, survey plot No. 548 in village Pipra P.S. Darunda in the district of Siwan. It is said that after the settlement, the name of Guljari Yadav and others were recorded in Register II by the Circle Officer and that the complainant was the heir of the aforesaid Guljari Yadav while witness Nos. 1 and 3 are heirs of khatiyani raiyats. It has been alleged that petitioner No.1, Lalan Yadav, in connivance with the other accused persons in order to usurp the land of the complainant prepared a false sale deed and when the complainant came to know about this he went to Maharajganj Registration Office and got the relevant information from which it transpires that petitioner No.1 had executed several sale deeds in favour of certain persons in benami by deed Nos. 585, 586, 587 and 588 dated 22.2.2001 in respect of lands appertaining to survey plot No. 548. Khata No.45/21, the full and separate details regarding the alleged involvement of the petitioners in connection with the above case has been furnished. It has finally been alleged that all the accused persons conspired amongst themselves to usurp the lands of the complainant and in order to succeed with their conspiracy had got prepared 4 forged deeds.

(3.) It appears that the aforesaid complaint was sent to the concerned police station under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. and the Maharajganj police after due investigation submitted a final form reporting the case to be false. On receipt of the final form the learned Magistrate proceeded with the pending protest petition as a complaint case and after due inquiry under Section 202, Cr. P.C. took cognizance under Sections 465/34, I.P.C.