HAWA BIBI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these applications have been heard together as the same FIR has been challenged in both the applications as well as similar question of law and facts are involved and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Both applications have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the criminal prosecution and investigation including FIR being Pindrajora PS Case No. 45 of 2001, which was registered under Section 420, 467, 466, 120-B and 149, IPC.

(3.) Short facts as alleged in the FIR is that Bhikhu Mahto had purchased lands from Jagdamba Prasad by registered sale deed dated 29.12.1975 and the said land was subsequently sold by the said Jagdamba Prasad to Teju Ansari and Hawa Bibi, petitioners of W.P. (Cr.) No. 76 of 2002 by registered sale deed on 18.2.1992. The informant further claimed that he came to know about the subsequent sale only when his application for mutation was cancelled. Against the mutation order, the informant preferred an appeal before the L.R.D.C. which was dismissed and thereafter he preferred revision before the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur, Hazaribagh which is still pending. The complainant also filed a Title suit No. 26/1999 for a declaration that sale deed executed by Jagdamba Prasad in the name of Teju Ansari and Hawa Bibi are null and void. It is further alleged that the accused petitioners produced two plain agreement printed on non judicial stamp dated 29.12.1975 and 1.1.1983 which indicates that sale deeds executed by Jagdamba Prasad in 1975 in favour of the complainant was Kutkewala in nature and it was executed on payment of Rs. 6,000/-only whereas the complainant has to pay a sum of Rs. 13,000/- in total and the balance amount of Rs. 7,000/- was to be paid upto 1.7.1983, falling which the sale deed executed by Jagdamba Prasad would stand cancelled. That agreement is forged and fabricated paper prepared by the accused-petitioners as the signature of the complainant was shown over the said agreement but there is no signature of Jagdamba Prasad and as such the accused persons committed cheating and also fabricated the documents. Accordingly, the complaint petition was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, who sent the said application to the police station under Section 156 (3), Cr PC.