PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these petitions, the petitioners have sought for quashing of FIR No. 166/2022 registered with Police Station Shahjahanpur, District Bhiwadi for the offence under Sec. 420 IPC on the ground that the FIR does not contain any allegation against the petitioners and they are victims of malicious prosecution for personal grudge. Both the cases involve identical facts and grounds of challenge, hence are decided by this common order.

(2.) According to FIR, Banwari Lal, father of the complainant died on 28/4/2022. After cremation of the dead body, the nephew of the complainant namely Manish S/o Mitthan Lal left the house and came only on the 12th day of the ritual. Thereafter he again left the house. Conduct of Manish raised some suspicion in the mind of the informant and the informant got information from SBI Bank that Kisan Credit Card (KCC) loan standing in the name of Banwari Lal was cleared on 26/4/2022 through Manish and Manish got NOC from the Bank. Without knowledge of the legal heirs of Banwari Lal, 0.46 hectares of land was transferred sold to petitioner Ramesh Chand Yadav. The conspiracy was hatched by Manish and petitioner Rajesh for getting a sale deed executed by Banwari Lal on 26/4/2022 itself in favour of Ramesh Chand Yadav. The FIR was lodged on 18/5/2022. Simultaneously, a civil Case No. 46/14/2022 was brought before learned Additional District Judge, Mundawar by all the sons and daughters of late Banwari Lal for cancellation of sale deed referred in the FIR. In the civil suit, the informant of this case as well as father of Manish are plaintiffs of the suit and petitioner Pawan and Rajesh are not party to the suit. The plaint does not show any statement against the petitioner Pawan rather it stated that Manish, Rakesh and Ramesh Chand Yadav defendant No.1 of the suit, were serving some stupefying substance to keep mental condition of Banwari Lal unable to understand the nature of the transaction.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner Pawan submits that said Banwari Lal had executed an agreement to sale the same property to the petitioner on total consideration of Rs.18.00 lacs. Mr. Ramesh Chand was a witness on the said agreement to sale. However Ramesh Chand got the sale deed in his name on payment of total consideration of Rs.7,31,600.00 and the consideration money was paid in the Bank account of Banwari Lal. The complaint does not show that there was any forgery in the agreement to sale between the petitioner Pawan and late Banwari Lal nor there is any allegation that the petitioner Pawan was beneficiary to the transaction.