Criminal Writ Petition filed by a son to quash chargesheet under IPC sections 405, 406, 420, 465, 468 based on an FIR regarding alleged misappropriation of house property. Court held sufficient material for offence exists.
Petition for quashing of chargesheet dismissed.
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.
Cri.W.P. No. 14/2011
1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 14 OF 2011
Ajay s/o. Asaram Modi
....Petitioner.
Versus
Smt. Kesharbai w/o. Asaram Modi and Anr.
....Respondents.
Mr. A.H. Kasliwal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. V.M. Kagne, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. B.L. Dhas, APP for respondent No. 2.
CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE & SMT. I.K. JAIN, JJ. DATED : 30th March, 2015.
ORDER :
Cri.W.P. No. 14/2011
2
relevant time, she had reached 80 years of age. It is her case that house property bearing CTS No. 4306 situated at Gokulnagar, Nanded was purchased for her under sale deed of 1960 and she was living in this house. Petitioner is youngest son of respondent No. 1. It is her case that her husband died in the year 2004 and after the death of her husband, the petitioner started looking after her property. It is her case that she trusted the petitioner as she had love for the petitioner and petitioner had shown sincerity in the discharge of his duty. It is her case that he was taking care of bank account of complainant also.
Cri.W.P. No. 14/2011
3
petitioner had fraudulently prepared the sale deed dated 9.3.2007 in respect of the aforesaid house in his favour by showing some consideration. It is her case that when she realized that she was cheated, she filed civil suit and another proceeding. She requested the J.M.F.C. to take proper action and then the order under section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. was made. Crime was registered for the offences punishable under sections 420, 468 etc. of I.P.C. The chargesheet is now filed for offences punishable under sections 405, 406, 420, 465, 468 of I.P.C.
Cri.W.P. No. 14/2011
4
had withdrawn the amount from the account of petitioner. It appears that the cheque for Rs. 7.2 lakh was encashed on 13.3.2007 and from 15.3.2007 to 26.3.2007 most of the amount from this consideration was withdrawn by using cheques. The cheques were bearing consecutive numbers. It is the case of respondent No. 1 that she was living with petitioner. She was aged about 80 years and in view of these circumstances, it was necessary to show as to what was done with the amount of Rs. 6.25 lakh, if this amount was withdrawn within 11 days. There is no reply to this query from the petitioner. Attempt was made by this Court to see as to whether the matter can be settled and the matter was sent to mediator, but the dispute could not be settled.
Cri.W.P. No. 14/2011
5
credited in the account and that can be seen from the account statement. The stamp papers were purchased by person like Bhimrao Suryawanshi. Notice was published in newspaper like 'Sanj' from Nanded dated 27.2.2007 and the sale deed was executed on 9.3.2007. The market value of the property was shown as Rs. 17.14 lakh. It was shown that the property was sold for consideration of Rs. 7.2 lakh. The witnesses were not relatives of petitioner and respondent no. 1. If at all the mother wanted to give property to petitioner, she could have given in any way, but she would have taken care to see that her relatives remain present at the relevant time. It was her absolute property and there are aforesaid circumstances. She is feeling that she is cheated in view of the aforesaid circumstances. It cannot be said that false case is filed or it is a dispute of purely civil nature.
(i) AIR 1992 SUPREME COURT 604 (1) [State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal & Ors.],
(ii) 2010 ALL SCR 1921 [Shanti Budhiya Vesta Patel & Ors. Vs. Nirmala Jayprakash Tiwari & Ors.],
(iii) (2007) 13 Supreme Court Cases 107 [B. Suresh Yadav Vs. Sharifa Bee and Anr.],
Cri.W.P. No. 14/2011
6
(iv) 2011 ALL SCR 1601 [Joseph Salvaraj A. Vs. State of Gujrat & Ors.].
The facts and circumstances of each and every case are always different. The same set of circumstances may give right to civil action and they can also make out offence. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court holds that there is sufficient material to make out the offence of cheating and misappropriation. It is not possible to quash the proceeding filed against the petitioner after making investigation of the case.
[ SMT. I.K. JAIN, J. ] [ T.V. NALAWADE, J. ]
ssc/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings for cheating and criminal breach of trust arising from a property dispute between a mother and son can be quashed in the public interest.
Whether the allegations of cheating and misappropriation of consideration money prove the existence of a crime beyond a civil dispute.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal & Ors.Referred¶31
AIR 1992 SUPREME COURT 604 · Who else cites this
Shanti Budhiya Vesta Patel & Ors. Vs. Nirmala Jayprakash Tiwari & Ors.Referred¶32
2010 ALL SCR 1921 · Who else cites this
B. Suresh Yadav Vs. Sharifa Bee and Anr.Referred¶33
(2007) 13 Supreme Court Cases 107
Joseph Salvaraj A. Vs. State of Gujrat & Ors.Referred¶34
2011 ALL SCR 1601 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ajay s/o. Asaram Modi
Smt. Kesharbai w/o. Asaram Modi
T.V. Nalawade
I.K. Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
