Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of an order proceeded with a complaint as a complaint case in a property dispute.法院 dismissed the application as the issue is civil in nature and no legal infirmity was pointed out by the applicant.
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. no. 13087 of 2020 rejected.
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. - 2
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13087 of 2020
Applicant :- Brij Bhushan Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anjali Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Lakshmikant Bhatt, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The applicant by the instant application seeks the following relief:
"It is, therefore, most respectfully, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash/set aside the order dated 30.09.2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Meerut passed on an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. bearing Case No. 171 of 2019 (Brij Bhushan Vs. Ajay and others), under sections 420, 406, 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 352, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Ganga Nagar, District Meerut.
It is, further, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Meerut to pass a fresh order on aforesaid application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. directing the Station Officer, Police Station Ganga Nagar, District Meerut to lodged F.I.R. against accused persons under sections 420, 406, 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 352, 427 I.P.C. and/or to pass such other and further suitable order or direction as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
By the impugned order, the court below has proceeded with the complaint as a complaint case.
It is alleged by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant entered into a registered agreement to sale with the private opposite parties in respect to an immovable property. It is urged that the sale deed is not being executed and on insisting the accused persons committed the alleged offence.
Learned counsel for the opposite parties and learned A.G.A. submit that the nature of dispute is pure civil, the remedy available to the applicant is to file an appropriate suit for specific performance. The complaint tantamounts to malicious prosecution to pressurize the accused to settle the civil dispute out side the court.
On specific query, learned counsel for the applicant failed to point out any illegality, infirmity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order.
The application is, accordingly, rejected.
Order Date :- 22.10.2020 K.K. Maurya
Digitally signed by Justice Suneet Kumar Date: 2020.10.22 18:53:29 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an agreement to sale dispute amounting to a civil dispute should be treated as a criminal case under the Prevention of Fraud (Cheating) Act and related IPC sections.
Whether the Magistrate committed any jurisdictional error in proceeding with the complaint as a complaint case.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Brij Bhushan Sharma
State of U.P.
Ajay
Suneet Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
