Allowed

Sarla Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2018CRLR/654/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal revision petition challenging a discharge rejection order. The Court held that conflicting descriptions of land boundaries in two sale deeds executed by the applicant raised doubts about the prosecution case, necessitating fresh examination by the lower court.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 22.12.2017 was set aside, and the matter remitted to the Court below to examine the sale deeds and decide afresh.

Sarla Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 654 of 2018

¶3

Revisionist :- Sarla Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Madan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present revision has been filed against the order dated 22.12.2017 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3 Moradabad in Criminal Case No. 1563 of 2014 (State of U.P. Vs. Sarla Devi) in Case Crime No. 448 of 2010, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad, by which the discharge application filed by the applicant has been rejected.

¶7

In short the case set up by the applicant is that she is the owner of 520 square meters of land. She had sold 140 square meters of the said land one Sukhbir Singh on 3.11.2004 by registered sale deed dated 3.11.2004. The said Sukhbir Singh, in turn sold that land to the informant/opposite party no.2 on 3.2.2007.

¶8

Out of the remaining land, the applicant claims to have sold 121 square meter to Shishpal. However, according to the applicant there appears to be a boundary dispute between Sheeshpal and the applicant/opposite party no.2. Therefore, it is submitted that the charge sheet was wrongly submitted against the applicant. The applicant ought to have been discharged.

¶9

While the defence of the applicant as has been asserted in the present prosecution cannot be examined at this stage, for the purposes of testing the validity of the order passed by the learned Court below, it is to be seen whether there is any material existing on record as may justify the applicant to be discharged at this stage.

¶10

In so far as the material that is existing on record is concerned, it is seen that the two sale deeds dated 3.11.2004 and 3.2.2007 executed by the applicant, that give rise to the dispute, are both part of the case diary. It is stated that boundaries of the two plots against the two sale deeds, are clearly different, as is apparent from a plain reading of the said sale deeds.

¶11

If the description of the boundaries of the properties as given in the two sale deeds executed by the applicant (which forms part of the case diary) is shown to be different, it would be then be very difficult to accept that at this stage any reasonable case is made out against the applicant as may result in his conviction.

¶12

The impugned order dated 22.12.2017, therefore, cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to the Court below to decide the issue afresh, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

¶13

It shall be open to the learned court below to examine whether as a fact,

¶14

the two sale deeds are part of prosecution record and whether they give different descriptions of the properties sold by the applicant.

¶15

The present criminal revision is allowed .

¶16

Order Date :- 4.4.2018 Mini

Sarla Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarla Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilip Juneja Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mukesh and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Baburam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Sharan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Badruddin Shamsi Vs State of U.P. and Another