ASHOK SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.6.2012 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in G.R. Case No. 2128 of 2011, whereby the prayer of the petitioner for discharge has been rejected.

(2.) It appears that petitioner has been made accused in Kotwali P.S. Case No. 377 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 2128 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 420, 468, 471 of the I.P.C., which was instituted on the basis of written application given by one Sarvan Kumar Jatan, who had stated that the other co-accused persons (who have been described as Verma family in the F.I.R.), were residing on the land of the informant from the lifetime of the father of the informant. After the death of the informant's father, it transpired that they were having some title deed also with respect to the land on which they were residing. Subsequently, as it appears from the F.I.R., that the informant tried to get the vacant possession of the land and a title suit was also filed against the members of the Verma family by the informant and in the meantime, the informant also took steps to settle the matter, where the name of the petitioner came in the F.I.R. It is alleged that the petitioner informed the informant that a piece of suitable land was available for settling the persons belonging to Verma family and accordingly, the informant purchased the said land and transferred the same in favour of the co-accused persons belonging to Verma family. It appears from the F.I.R. that still thereafter, the land was not vacated by the co-accused persons and in the meantime even the title suit filed by the informant was dismissed for default.

(3.) It is further alleged against the petitioner that subsequently, the informant learnt that the land which was purchased by the informant for the co-accused persons, had been sold by them to the petitioner and petitioner was residing on the said land. The petitioner refused to vacate the land and threatened the informant. With these allegations, the FIR was lodged in which the persons belonging the Verma family, as well as the petitioner were made accused.