Disposed

Kameshwar Prasad Tiwari and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Apr 2024A482/3141/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This interim order records proceedings in an Article 226/Section 482 application regarding a dispute over a property sale. The court directed the issuance of notices to the opposite parties, allotted time limits for filing counter and rejoinder affidavits, and stayed further proceedings in the criminal case pending the next hearing date.

What did the court decide?

Issue notice, allow time for counter affidavit and rejoinder, stay further proceedings in the criminal case till the next date.

Kameshwar Prasad Tiwari and 2 Others vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3141 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Kameshwar Prasad Tiwari And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, and the learned A.G.A. for the State/opp. party No. 1, and perused the record.

¶7

This application Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.444 of 2024; State Versus Kameshwar Prasad Tiwari and others, arising out of Case Crime No.50 of 2023, under sections- 323, 504, 506, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., relating to Police Station- Kotwali Bhinga, DistrictShrawasti, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shrawasti, as well as impugned chargesheet no.A260/23, dated 8.7.2023, submitted by the Investigating Officer against the petitioners, under sections- 323, 504, 506, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C. in aforesaid Case Crime number, and impugned cognizance/ summoning order dated 20.1.2024, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shrawasti, as contained in Annexure nos. 1 and 2 respectively to this petition, so far as the same relate to the petitioners.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are innocent persons. They were in search of some good land and somebody informed them that the opp. party No. 2 is interested to sell his land, if he gets good saleconsideration. Thereafter the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 came in contact with opp. party No. 2 in respect of the alleged land and in good faith after paying the sale-consideration of Rs. 16 lacs of the land bearing Gata No. 918 measuring 0.297 Hectare situated in Villge Kabbapur Kalan, Pargana Tulsipur, Tehsil Bhinga, District Shrawasti, got registered the said land from the opp. party No. 2 and the said sale-deed was registered before the office of the concerned Sub Registrar at Shrawasti on 5.1.2023. Thereafter, a suit for cancellation of the sale-deed bearing Suit No. 57 of 2023 was filed by the opp. party No. 2 before the Court of the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Shrawasti, claiming that the said sale-deed was executed by some other person claiming himself to the opp. party No. 2 Ram Dhyan.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that as soon as the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 came to know that some other person had executed the sale-deed claiming himself to be the opp. party No. 2 Ram Dhyan, they also immediately moved the suit for cancellation of sale-deed and they also stopped the payment from their bank, which they had made for the alleged sale-deed, thus, the counsel submits that there is a bona fide mistake made on behalf of the applicants, that they have taken the land from a wrong person, who was actually not the owner of the said land and no sooner did this fact came to their knowledge, the applicant nos. 1 and 2 immediately moved suit for cancellation of the sale-deed. The applicant No. 3, who is only a marginal witness was also not aware of this fact.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that as the opp. party No. 2 has already moved the suit for cancellation of the sale-deed, which is the correct remedy, thus, the present F.I.R lodged against the applicants is nothbing, but an abuse of the process of law and he has adopted a short-cut method only with intention to create pressure and to harass the applicants. It has been further stated that the said F.I.R. was loded by moving an application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. and the F.I.R. was lodged after filing of cancellation suit by the opp. party No. 2 and suit for cancellation of the sale-deed has also been filed by the applicants, thus, the present F.I.R. is only an afterthought by taking legal advice from the legal expert, thus, he submits that it is purely a civil dispute and a remedy has already been availed by the opp. party No. 2, thus, the present case is nothing, but an abuse of the process of law and the opp. party No. 2 has tried to give colour to a civil dispute into a criminal prosecution. He prays for interim relief.

¶11

The matter requires consideration on the facts and law both.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, has accepted notice on behalf of the opp. party No. 1.

¶13

Issue notice to the opposite party No. 2 R.P.A.D.

¶14

Steps for service of notice be taken within 2 weeks.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. as well as opp. Party No. 2 are allowed 4 weeks' time to file counter affidavit. 2 weeks' time thereafter is allowed to the applicants for filing rejoinder affidavit, if any.

¶16

Put up this case on 05.08.2024 .

¶17

Till the next date of listing, further proceeding of the Criminal Case No.444 of 2024; State Versus Kameshwar Prasad Tiwari

¶18

and others, arising out of Case Crime No.50 of 2023, under sections- 323, 504, 506, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., relating to Police Station- Kotwali Bhinga, District- Shrawasti, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shrawasti, as well as impugned chargesheet no.A-260/23, dated 8.7.2023, submitted by the Investigating Officer against the petitioners, under sections- 323, 504, 506, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C. in aforesaid Case Crime number, and impugned cognizance/ summoning order dated 20.1.2024, passed in the said case, so far as the same relate to the petitioners, shall remain stayed.

¶19

( Shamim Ahmed, J. )

¶20

Order Date :- 9.4.2024 A.Nigam

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Kameshwar Prasad Tiwari and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kameshwar Prasad Tiwari and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Rastogi @ Jagdamba Prasad Rastogi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Mohd. Yoonus Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin, Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Jannu Gaddi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt.Lko

Khajan Singh Yadav @ Khajan Singh vs Mr. Rajiv Kumar Srivastava, Addl. General Manager, Iti Ltd., Rae Bareli

Kishore Chandra Mishra vs Shri Mohammad Arif, Branch Manager , Bank of India Purwa Branch Distt. Unnao

Shashank Mishra vs Sri Dr. Vinod Kumar Singh Registrar Lucknow University Lko.