Court No. - 20
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13643 of 2012 Applicant :- Dayal Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- A.K. Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :-
Govt.Advocate,Rakesh Kumar Shukla,Sudama Ji Shandilya
Hon'ble Raghvendra Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants,learned A.G.A.for the State of U.P.and learned counsel for O.P.No.2.
It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant no.1 and applicant no.2 that the applicants are bonafide purchasers and the opposite party no.2 is a Parda-nasheen lady. It has been further submitted that the statement of Lekhpal at Page 53 also favours the case of the applicants. The allegations are that the accused-applicants along with other accused persons persuaded O.P.No.2 Yaqoob Ahmad Mansoori to purchase the property of Khasra Plot No. 1873 and 1874 knowingly that the alleged property belongs to one Smt. Suman wife of Dayal Singh. The FIR further reveals that Dayal Singh, Raghuvir Singh, Smt.Suman and Viredra Singh approached to O.P.No.2 at his residence while he was having interaction with one brother Salim on the pretext of marriage.
Learned A.G.A.and Opposite Party No.2 have submitted that Smt. Suman is wife of Dayal Singh. The FIR allegations reveals the presence of both the accused applicants at the time of negotiation for sale. The fraud has knowingly been committed with O.P.No.2.
After FIR, the case was investigated, which culminated into filing of police report in the shape of Charge sheet against the accused applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants has failed to demonstrate the illegality committed by investigating officer during the course of investigation. Whether there was persuasion by the accused applicants for the purchase of the property as referred above, is a question of fact, which can be adjudicated subject to evidence of the parties. The statements of Sub Registrar and Lekhpal in their concluding part reveals the factum of fraud. In absence of evidence, no finding with respect to the factual pleas can be recorded at this stage as it is beyond the purview of Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again has emphasized that inherent power conferred under section 482 Cr.P.C.should be invoked sparingly and rarely with complete circumspection. The factual inquiry is also beyond the scope of S.482 Cr.P.C.
On the basis of the reasons stated above, the application under section 482 Cr.P.C.is bereft of merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.11.2017 Su