Dharmpal Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

Dharmpal Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application dismissed. Directions: (i) if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days and apply for bail, their bail prayer shall be considered in view of Amrawati (2004 (57) ALR 290) and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh (2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)); (ii) no coercive action against the applicants for 30 days; (iii) if they fail to appear within that period, coercive action shall be taken; (iv) liberty to move a discharge application at the appropriate stage before the concerned court, to be decided in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the application under Section 482 CrPC for setting aside chargesheet No. 434 of 2019 should be allowed on the applicants' plea that the matter is essentially a civil dispute in which title was already adjudicated in their favour, so that no offence/fraud was committed.

Court's answer

The earlier civil judgment was rendered in a suit for decree of injunction; its discussion of ownership while deciding the question of possession did not constitute adjudication of title by a competent court having jurisdiction over agricultural land, so the prior civil proceedings did not bar the criminal case.

Ratio / Principle

Evidence collected in statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC in the course of investigation existed for submission of the chargesheet; therefore it cannot be said that the chargesheet was without any offence.

Key takeaways

No ground exists for indulgence in exercise of inherent power under Section 482 CrPC; the application, being devoid of merits, stands dismissed.ratio¶¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Section 482 CrPC — quashing of chargesheet refused. Applicants Dharampal Singh and Shahjahan sought setting aside of chargesheet No. 434 of 2019 (dated 9.8.2019) in Criminal Case No.1127 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No.334 of 2019 under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, P.S. Chandpur, District Bijnor, pleading a prior civil adjudication of title in favour of applicant No.1's father (appeal dismissed in default, judgment final) and a consequent sale deed to applicant No.2. The Court held that the earlier decree was in a suit for injunction and its ownership discussion, made while deciding possession, was not adjudication of title by a court competent over agricultural land; further, statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC furnished evidence for the chargesheet, which therefore could not be called one 'without any offence'. Application dismissed; applicants given 30 days to surrender and apply for bail, to be considered per Amrawati (2004 (57) ALR 290) and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh (2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC)); no coercive action for 30 days; liberty to move a discharge application.

Court No. - 74

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1311 of 2020

Applicant :- Dharmpal Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Rajiv Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

This Application, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the Applicants, Dharampal Singh and Shahjahan, with a prayer for setting aside impugned chargesheet No. 434 of 2019, dated 9.8.2019, in Criminal Case No.1127 of 2019 (State vs. Ali Hasan and others), arising out of Case Crime No.334 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471of IPC, Police Station-Chandpur, District Bijnor, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Chandpur, Bijnor.

Learned counsel for applicants argued that matter involves civil dispute and previously, there had been civil case in between the parties, wherein, father of applicant no.1 was held as the owner of property in question. Against said judgment of Trial court, an Appeal was filed before the High Court, but, this was dismissed in default of appellant. Hence, judgment of Trial court attained finality and in adjudication of Issue Nos. 1 and 4, the ownership was held to be of father of applicant No.1 and in lieu of it, applicant No.1 had executed sale deed in favour of applicant no.2. There was a case filed by Tejpal showing as vendor and it was dismissed and the order passed in suit attained finality with no Appeal. Hence, no fraud was committed.

Learned AGA, representing State of U.P., has vehemently opposed this Application.

The impugned judgment reveals that it was a Suit, filed for decree of injunction, and in above judgment, while deciding question of possession, some discussion about ownership has been made, but, it was not adjudication of title by a competent court having jurisdiction for adjudication of title over agricultural land.

Evidence, collected in the statements, recorded, under Section 161 of Cr.P.C, in the course of investigation, was there for submission of chargesheet. Hence, it cannot be said that it was a chargeheet, without any offence.

Accordingly, no ground for any indulgence, in exercise of inherent power, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is there. Therefore, this Application, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., being devoid of merits, stands dismissed.

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

In case, if the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

Further, the applicants may move Discharge Application at appropriate stage before the court, concerned, where it shall be decided, in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 23.1.2020

bgs/