NARENDRA PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant miscellaneous petition has been filed the petitioner against the order dated 3.10.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Pali in revision whereby he has upheld the order dated 6.4.2012 passed by the CJM Pali original complaint case No. 14/ 2012 whereby the learned CJM refused to summon the accused on the basis of the complaint filed by the petitioner.

(2.) Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner herein filed a complaint in the Court of CJM, Pali for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 116 and 120B I.P.C, under Sections 81 & 82 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 as also under Sections 71,72A, 73 and 74 of the Information Technology Act. The complainant alleged that he was a contractor and was involved in the construction of new houses and also did the jobs of the alteration of old houses. He alleged that late Chhabaldas owned a house at Sindhi Colony, Pali. After the death of Chhabaldas and his wife Smt. Savitri, the respondents No. 1 to 4 arrayed as accused in the complaint approached the complainant and requested him that the accused No. 3 and 4 were to be married and therefore, the complainant should carry out construction work on the said house and give it the shape of a good new building. The complainant further alleged that he agreed to the said proposal of the accused. He allegedly put in immense efforts and expenses and completed the construction work for renewing the building in the stipulated time. It was also alleged that the total amount to be paid to the complainant as per the contract was fixed at Rs. 13,73,300. He further alleged that despite the construction being completed by the complainant, the accused only made a payment of Rs. 6,05,500 and avoided to make the payment of balance amount to him. The complainant alleged that an allurement was given by the accused to him that the balance amount would be paid to the complainant after taking loan from the bank or else the shops constructed in the building would be sold and the final payment will be made to the complainant.

(3.) The complainant further alleged that the accused Laxmandas expressed to him that he had procured a relinquishment deed in favour of Mool Chand and had procured a loan of Rs. 6 lacs from the City Finance. He was also told that Mool Chand had expired, and therefore, his legal heirs Lajwanti and other would have the registration of the house executed in favour of Laxmandas. Thereafter another relinquishment deed was allegedly procured on 4.8.2008 which was signed by the accused No. 1 to 7. He further alleged that both the relinquishment deeds were registered by the Sub-Registrar Ashok Kumar Tyagi. The complainant alleged that the relinquishment deeds were forged and fraudulent. After the execution of the subsequent relinquishment deed, the accused No. 1 to 8 conspired with Jagdish Chandla Chhabra, Bank Manager, Bank of Baroda and took a loan of Rs. 10,00,000 towards the construction of the house. The Bank Manager sanctioned the loan without enquiring about the title.Thereafter the accused conspired with Ganesh Soni and sold five of shops for a sum of Rs.16 lacs. Accused Hemant, Lalit, Naresh and Prakash attested the sale deed. The complainant allegedly gave an information to the S.P. Pali, the Bank Manager Jagdish Chandra Chhabra and Sub Registrar Ashok Kumar Tyagi but the accused had entered into a deep rooted conspiracy, and therefore, were defending each other and so no action was taken against them.