SATISH KUMAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant criminal revision has been directed against the judgment dtd. 29/2/2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Saraikella in Criminal Appeal No. 94 of 2013 whereby and whereunder while dismissing the appeal upheld the judgment of conviction and sentence dtd. 12/6/2013 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikela in G.R. Case No. 520 of 2009 (T.R. No.910 of 2013) convicting the petitioner under Sec. 420 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him with rigorous imprisonment for 2 years alongwith fine of Rs.1,000.00 and in default of payment of fine further simple imprisonment of 3 months has been directed to undergo.

(2.) The brief facts of prosecution case giving rise to this criminal revision are that the accused Satish Kumar Sahu came to the house of informant and expressed his intention to sell the land of plot no.1709/1787, Khata No. 124, measuring area 0.30 decimal (12 katha), Thana No. 45, Mouza Kandra, PS Gamharia, District Saraikella at the rate of Rs.24,000.00 per katha. The informant agreed to purchase the land at the very rate and paid Rs.38,500.00 on different dates. The accused executed an agreement to sale and also promised to execute the sale deed within three months but the accused did not reach to the Registry Office to execute the sale deed in favour of the informant as was agreed. In the meantime, the accused has also given permission to the Airtel mobile company for erection of mobile tower on the very land under an agreement without any consent of the informant. When the informant visited the said land, he found the work was in progress for erection of the mobile tower on the very land. Same was opposed by the informant but was told by the accused persons that the sanction of mobile tower has been accorded. The informant asked the accused to execute the sale deed in his favour in compliance of the agreement to sale but he paid no heed at all rather accused warned to the informant not to insist for execution of sale deed in failure to face the dire consequences. Hence on this complaint by the order of CJM concerned, Adityapur P.S. Case No.157 of 2009 was registered against the accused Satish Kumar Sahu for the offence under Sec. 420, 467, 468, 120B of IPC. The investigating officer after having concluded the investigation filed charge-sheet against the accused for the offence under Sec. 420, 467, 468, 120B of IPC.

(3.) The court of CJM, Saraikella took cognizance on the charge-sheet and framed charge against the accused for the offence under Sec. 420, 467, 468, 120B of IPC. The charge was also read over and explained to the accused who denied the charge and claimed to face the trial.