Dismissed

Triyugi Narayan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2024/709/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) examined an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by Triyugi Narayan seeking to quash proceedings arising from a FIR alleging false sale deed execution and forcible possession. Relying on the facts of joint property and lack of partition, the court held a case for trial was made out.

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing of charge sheet, summoning order, and proceedings under Sections 419, 420, 504 & 506 IPC dismissed.

Triyugi Narayan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:8115

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 709 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Triyugi Narayan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shivam Srivastava,Mohit Singh,Rahul Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Shivam Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Maurya, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has sought quashing of the charge sheet No. 01 dated 16/09/2022, summoning order dated 03.01.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 1311 of 2022 (State v. Triyuginarayan & Ors.) arising out of Case Crime No. 54 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 504 & 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Itiathok, District Gonda pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Gonda.

¶8

In the FIR lodged on 13.03.2022 against six persons, including the applicant, the opposite party no. 2 alleged that the applicant, acting under a criminal conspiracy with all other accused persons, executed a false sale deed dated 10.01.2022 in favour of co-accused persons Kamal Babu, Umanath Singh, Gopal Singh and other co-accused Raksha Ram and Prahlad had witnessed the execution of the sale deed and on the strength of the aforesaid sale deed, the other accused persons broke open the lock of the house in question and took forcible possession of it and removed certain valuable goods kept in the house.

¶9

After investigation, the police submitted a charge sheet dated 16.09.2022 under Sections 419, 420, 504 & 506 IPC, The trial court took cognizance of the offences by means of an order dated 03.01.2023 and summoned the accused persons to face the trial.

¶10

A copy of the relevant extract of khatauni has been annexed with the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., wherein the land bearing Khasra No. 92 is recorded in the names of 33 persons, including the applicant and the learned counsel for the applicant

¶11

stated that no partition has taken place amongst the tenure holders till date. Therefore, from the documents annexed with the application itself, it appears that the applicant is a co-tenure holder of the land bearing Gata No. 92. A copy of the sale deed dated 10.01.20232 executed by the applicant has already been annexed with the applicant, wherein he has stated that he is the exclusive owner of the property in question and there is no other co-owner or joint owner thereof.

¶12

From the aforesaid material placed before the Court by the applicant himself, it appears that he had sold away a part of joint property held by 33 persons, claiming itself to be his exclusive property, without any partition of the property having taken place.

¶13

From the aforesaid facts, it appears that a case for trial of the applicant for the alleged offence is clearly made out.

¶14

The application lacks merit and the same is accordingly dismissed .

¶15

Order Date :- 29.1.2024 Pradeep/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Triyugi Narayan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Triyugi Narayan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohammad Daood Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Shivpyari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Mohd. Mahfooz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Kapil Dev Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Sonu @ Shanu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Narendra Kumar (Ex Constable) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another