High Court in revision dismissed petition challenging Special Judge's rejection of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. application. Court held civil dispute over consideration is for civil forum, not criminal process.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 10
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1276 of 2018
Revisionist :- Prem Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Onkar Nath Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A.
By the instant revision, revisionist is assailing the order dated 8 March 2018 passed by the Special Judge (DAA) Etah, whereby, an application filed by the revisionist under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
The court below has rejected the complaint filed by the revisionist under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.. It is noted in the impugned order that on the report submitted by the concerned police station, it appears that revisionist had voluntarily executed sale-deed in favour of the accused person. Thereafter, name of the accused person has been duly mutated in the revenue record. It is sought to be urged that the deed was executed without consideration.
In my opinion, the court below was justified in rejecting the application. Remedy available to the applicant is to approach appropriate civil forum for redressal of his grievance. Under the garb of criminal proceeding, civil right cannot be adjudicated upon. I find no reason to entertain this petition.
The revision is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.4.2018 Mukesh Kr.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a complaint alleging voluntary sale-deed without consideration can be entertained under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Suneet Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
