This is a criminal miscellaneous application seeking to quash an order dated 06.05.2022 where cognizance was taken under IPC Sections 420 and 465. The High Court dismissed the application after hearing counsel.
The application for quashing the order dated 06.05.2022 was 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15156 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-599 Year-2022 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran
====================================================== SUNITA PANDEY Wife of Sri Visheshwar Pandey, D/O Late Krishna Pandey Resident of- Banpura Pandey Tola, P.S.- Rasulpur, District- Saran, presently residing at house no. 51, New Azad Nagar, Satwari Road, Shyam Nagar, P.S.Chakeri, District- Kanpur (U.P.).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bishwajeet Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER
2 09-08-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15156 of 2023(2) dt.09-08-2023 2/3
alleging that he owns land bearing khata no. 300, survey plot no. 1353, 1378 measuring 3 Kathas 5 dhurs, situated at village Sadha under Muffasil P.S., Chapra. It is further alleged that after death of his father in 2004 he became absolute owner of these properties. He has filed Title Suit No. 313/2016 in respect of above mentioned plots as well as other plots which is pending before Sub Judge-1st, Civil Court, Chapra. It is further alleged that accused Sunita Pandey and her husband co-accused Visheshwar Pandey and other accused persons conspired and got executed a registered sale deed dated 30.08.2017 by Sunita Pandey. The sale deed contained wrong recital that the land is free from encumbrance but the fact is that Title suit is pending in respect of the properties and there is an injunction order in favour of complainant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15156 of 2023(2) dt.09-08-2023 3/3
carving out her share.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Ranjeet/- U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an application for quashing of the order taken in cognizance of an offence under Sections 420 and 465 IPC should be allowed given the pending partition suit facts.
The petitioner's justification for selling undivided joint family property during pendency of partition suit.
Whether the alleged false recitals in the sale deed regarding encumbrance and injunction orders warrant criminal prosecution or quash.
Sunita Pandey
The State of Bihar
Pawan Kumar Pandey
Sandeep Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
