BANSI LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Sec. 482 CrPC petitioner seeks the remedy of quashing the FIR No. 211/94, P.S. Tibi, District Hanumangarh for offences under Secs 420, 457 and 471 IPC.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and gone through the case diary of CR No. 268/96. One Mohan Das filed a private complaint in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Tibi on 16.8.1994 that his father Asu Mal had agriculture land in Chack No. 1-2-3-4 SGN and 1 & 3 KNR Tehsil Tibi. He died on 10.11.1965 in village Kalol, Gujarat. It was stated that his father never went to Jaipur nor did he give any power of attorney in favour of Bansi Lal, the petitioner. It was alleged that Bansi Lal intentionally and knowingly prepared a forged power of attorney of his father on 16.6.1981 and got it registered with Sub Registar, Jaipur. Bansi Lal knowing it to be a forged document used it and sold out the agriculture land to Subhash Chand, Baldev and others on 17.10.1985 and received money from them. Learned Judicial Magistrate forwarded the complaint under Sec. 156 (3) CrPC to P.S. Tibi for investigation. Police registered a case under Secs. 420, 467 and 471 IPC on 24.8.1994. Investigation was entrusted to one Om Prakash Bishnoi, Police Insepector earlier and he came to conclusion that no case was made out. He, therefore, submitted final report. The matter was re-investigated by another Police Officer who also arrived to the same conclusion. The complainant had links with high echelons of Police and therefore, he approached them. The matter was again investigated by Shri Budh Ram, ASI who was under the influence of the complainant and in collusion, contemplated to charge-sheet the petitioner in a false case. A pre-arrest bail application was moved but was rejected by this court on 9.11.1994 as Police had given FR and the petitioner s counsel did not press the bail application. Second bail application was moved which was also rejected on 18.3.1996 as not having been pressed.

(3.) The quashing of proceedings has been sought on the grounds that a civil suit was filed before the Civil Judge, Tibi against the petitioner and therefore, it is only the civil court which will have power to file complaint and the cognizance of offence under Sec. 467 and 471 IPC would be barred in view of Sec. 195 CrPC, that a question of jurisdiction is involved as the document was prepared at jlaipur and Police Station, Tibi has no jurisdiction. The third ground is that the power of attorney was prepared in the year 1981 and the complaint was filed late in the year 1994.