NAZEER AHMED Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., eight petitioners namely, Nazeer Ahmed and others seek to quash the First Information Report No. 498/2000 Police Station, Ghadsana, Tehsil Anoopgarh, District Sri Ganganagar for offence under sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC.

(2.) It is submitted that the instant case is a glaring case of abuse of process of Court. The substance of the allegation of the second respondent namely Khairdeen that petitioners entered into a conspiracy and forged the Will of his father Ameer Baksh with respect to land measuring 47 bighas and 15 biswas in Muraba No. 61/44 of Chak No. 10M, 2.18 bighas in Muraba No. 61/15 of Chak No. 11H, 4.17 bighas from Kill No. 21 to 25 of Muraba No. 102/63 of Chak 8 MD and 25 bighas of Muraba No. 43/17 of Chak 18 MD(A) with an intention to deprive him of his father's property. They also got the land mutated in the name of first petitioner-Nazeer Ahmed and second petitioner-Sameebi. The record shows that the disputed Will was executed on 4.4.1987. The complainant raised objection during mutation proceedings before the Revenue Authorities but the same was rejected by the order dated 20.12.1990 passed by the Sub-divisional Officer, Raisingh Nagar observing that the cancellation of Will is within the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts. Thereafter, a revenue suit was filed but the same was also dismissed by the order of the Assistant Collector dated 14.7.1,993 on the ground that the revenue Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and the controversy can be decided only by the Civil Court. The said decision has been upheld by the Revenue Appellate Authority. Second appeal has also been dismissed by the order of the Board of Revenue dated 5.12.1996. Certain revenue proceedings were again initiated by the complainant in second appeal but he did not succeeded. The complainant has filed a civil suit which is pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Anoopgarh for declaration and possession of the lands in question. In the said suit one of the issues is about the genuineness of the Will. The suit filed in the year 1997 is still pending. A criminal complaint was also filed on the same allegation on 20.11.1990 which was sent to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The case was registered as FIR Case No. 219/1990 for offence.u/ss. 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Ghadsana. Police gave the Final Report bearing No 68/1990. The protest petition was filed which was registered as P.C. No. 183/2000. The protest petition was rejected and the Final Report was accepted by the order dated 20.10.2000. On the very next day i.e. on 21.10.2000, the First Information Report under challenge has been filed. The narration of the FIR. clearly shows that the dispute is of civil nature and infact is pending before the civil Court. On the same facts, the police has also given F.R. which after hearing the complainant has been accepted.

(3.) The continuance of investigation in FIR Case No. 498/2000, in my opinion, is abuse of the process of Court. In order to secure ends of justice, it is desirable to quash the FIR under challenge.