Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14022 of 2018 Applicant :- Rajmani And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- A.K. Mishra,Sati Shanker Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Prem Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 28.10.2017 as well as cognizance order dated 28.2.2018 and the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 201/2018 (State Vs. Rajmani and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 687 of 2016, under Sections 323, 504, 147, 149, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Handia, District Allahabad, pending in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.9, Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the dispute between the parties is purely civil with regard to cancellation of the sale deed executed by the opposite party no.2 on 21.6.2016. Also, the proceeding under Section 34 of the Land Holdings Act, are stated to be pending in respect of mutation sought by Raj Kumari under the sale deed executed by opposite party no.2. He therefore submits that the opposite party no.2 who is the wife of late Gajadhar and she has falsely implicated the applicants claiming to be wife of Chintamani.
Sri Prem Shanker Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 has produced extract of the case diary where from it is shown that during the investigation, the evidence had been gathered to the effect that the entries in the ration card as also voter I.D. card regarding Kewala Devi wife of Chintamani had been obtained by practising fraud and such entries have also been corrected.
In view of the above noted facts, the dispute between the parties involves adjudication of factual disputes that would require evidence to be led before any conclusion can be reached whether the applicants are guilty on forgery or not. Such exercise cannot be gone into the present proceedings.
The present application lacks merits and accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 24.4.2018 Mini