CHANDRA LAL BHAKARAL, ASSISTANT COLLECTOR CUM EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, SHAHPURA DISTT. JAIPUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -The petitioner Chandra Lal Bhakaria, Assistant Collector cum Executive Magistrate, has filed this petition under Sec. 482 Cr.PC. for quashing and setting aside the First Information Report No. 409/97 registered at Police Station Shahpura under Sections 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 477, 477A, 167 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The facts necessary for the disposal of instant petition are that a revenue suit was instituted by Mangal and Prabhu against Smt. Sanjya and Kane in the Court of Assistant Collector cum Executive Magistrate Shahpura on Sept. 18, 1997. Along with the suit an application for seeking temporary injunction was also filed. The petitioner was the Presiding Officer of the said court at that time. The accusation against the petitioner is that he forged the judicial record. He did not pass the interim order initially any only issued notices and signed the order sheet but after meeting with the counsel for the applicant of interim application he changed the order sheet and issued interim order. Smt. Sanjya the opposite party of the revenue application instituted complaint on Nov. 25, 1997 against the petitioner and three other persons in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Shahpura. Complaint was forwarded under Sec. 156 (3) Cr.PC. to the Police Station Shahpura where FIR No. 409/97 was registered on Nov. 29, 1997 under Sec. 167, 420, 466, 467, 468, 471, 477 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and investigation commenced.

(3.) Mr. PK. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner canvassed that Madho Lal Bunkar the clerk and Revenue Ahlamad of Assistant Collector and Executive Magistrate Shahpura is the person who forged the signatures of the petitioner but he has become witness of the prosecution and his statement under Sec. 164 Cr.PC. has been recorded. Certified copy of the statement of Madho Lal Bunkar has been annexed with the petition which reveals that occurrence had taken place on Sept. 20, 1997 whereas according to FIR it took place on Sept. 19, 1997. The investigating officer was supplied with the photostat copy of the order sheet dated Sept. 19,1997 which does not bear the signature of the petitioner. So called signatures on the order sheet dated Sept. 19, 1997 are in the handwriting of Madho Lal Bunkar. It was further contended by the learned counsel that in case No. 145/97 the petitioner made a complaint of Shri Sita Ram Nausadar Advocate to the Bar Counsel of Rajasthan Jodhpur on Aug. 30, 1997. Certified copy of the order sheet dated Aug. 30, 1997 has been annexed with the petition. It was also urged by the learned counsel that Madho Lal Bunkar is the accused in criminal case FIR No. 122/95 under Sec. 323, 341 and 447 IPC. pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate Shahpura. In the said criminal case Madholal Bunkar is the client of Shri Sita Ram Nausadar Advocate. Certified copy of FIR No. 122/95 has been filed with the petition. Sum and substance of the arguments of learned counsel is that the petitioner has been falsely implicated by Madho Lal Bunkar and Shri Sita Ram Nausadar in the instant criminal case and FIR as well as entire investigation deserves to be quashed.