NARPAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJ & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two misc. petitions have been preferred by the respective petitioners seeking quashing of the F.I.R. 77/2012 registered at P.S. Maoth Dist. Nagaur for the offences under Sections 166, 167, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B I.P.C.

(2.) Mr. Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner Narpat Singh urges that exfacie the F.I.R. impugned amounts to gross abuse of the process of the Court and thus deserves to be quashed. He submits that the petitioner is the owner of the property. He bonafide applied to the Panchayat for issuance of a Patta regarding the disputed property. The Panchayat after following due process of law directed issuance of Patta in favour of the petitioner Narpat Singh. Learned counsel submits that civil proceedings have also been initiated regarding the property in question and continuation of investigation of the impugned F.I.R. is grossly illegal and amounts to gross abuse of the process of the Court. He, therefore, prays that the misc. petition deserves to be accepted and the impugned F.I.R. deserves to be quashed.

(3.) Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner Chunnilal and others in Misc. Petition No. 2802/2012 submits that the petitioners are Sarpanch, Panchas and the employees of the Panchayat. The Panchayat after holding lawful proceedings in its quorum directed issuance of Patta to Narpat Singh. Learned counsel submits that the Patta in question was issued by the Panchayat following due process of law and thus no malafides can be attributed to the petitioners for their act. He contends that the continuation of investigation of the F.I.R. impugned is grossly illegal and amounts to abuse of the process of the Court. He, therefore, urges that the F.I.R. impugned be quashed and the misc. petition may be accepted.