Allowed

Smt.Kamlesh Kumar and Anr. v. State

Rajasthan HC13 Nov 2014CRLMP/1478/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR alleging cheating and criminal conspiracy. The Court noted discrepancies between the cancellation order date and the sale deed date but ultimately found the case made out and allowed the petition with a direction to quash the FIR.

What did the court decide?

The FIR No.328/2008 registered with Police Station Kotwali Alwar, District Alwar is quashed. The criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed.

Smt.Kamlesh Kumar and Anr. Vs State — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2014)

¶1

S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.1478/2008 (Smt. Kamlesh Kumari & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

¶4

S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.1478/2008 (Smt. Kamlesh Kumari & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.)

¶5

Date of Order : 13th November, 2014

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.BHANDARI

¶7

Mr.Nitin Jain, for the petitioner/s. Mr.Sudesh Saini, Public Prosecutor.

¶8

By the Court:

¶9

By this criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., a challenge is made to FIR No.328/2008 registered with Police Station Kotwali Alwar, District Alwar.

¶10

It is submitted that house alloted by the UIT was sold to the complainant under registered sale deed on 31^st January, 2007. The allotment was subsequently cancelled by the UIT vide order dated 09^th January, 2008 whereas in the FIR , it was shown to be 09^th January, 2007, i.e., prior to the sale of house to the complainant. The allegation against the petitioners are not made out as sale of house would not have been registered if allotment of the house was already cancelled by the UIT and otherwise, the order of cancellation is dated 09^th January, 2008. In view of above, an interim order was passed by this Court restraining the prosecution to file the charge sheet against the petitioners. A litigation was also initiated by the purchaser by maintaining a suit against the UIT against the

¶11

S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.1478/2008 (Smt. Kamlesh Kumari & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.)

¶12

¶13

cancellation. In view of the above, the FIR registered against the petitioners deserves to be quashed.

¶14

None appears on behalf of the complainant to oppose the petition, however, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶15

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel and perused the FIR.

¶16

It is alleged that house was sold to the complainant despite its cancellation by the UIT. The sale is through registered sale deed and a civil suit has already been filed by the complainant against the cancellation. In view of above and looking to the facts of this case, I do find that case is made out against the petitioners for offence under Sections 406, 420 & 120-B of IPC. Accordingly, the

¶17

FIR registered against the petitioners bearing No.328/2008 registered with Police Station Kotwali Alwar, Distirct Alwar is quashed.

¶18

This criminal miscellaneous petition stands allowed with the aforesaid.

¶19

(M.N. BHANDARI), J.

¶20

S/No.13 Preeti, P.A.

¶21

All cor r ect ion s m ad e in t h e j u d gm en t / or d er h ave been in cor por at ed in t h e j u dgm en t / or der bein g em ailed.

¶22

Pr eet i Asopa P.A.

¶23

S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.1478/2008

¶24

(Smt. Kamlesh Kumari & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.)

¶25

Smt.Kamlesh Kumar and Anr. v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Kamlesh Kumar and Anr. v. State

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

Similar cases

Tarachand@Tara Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Dashrath Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Vinod Vadhwani Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Smt Pooja and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Pramod Agarwal Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rajendra Prasad Gurjar Vs State