Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the property in question is khatiyani land. petitioner no. 3 Reshma Devi got the aforesaid property in partition and she gifted out the aforesaid property to the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, who happen to be her sons by gift deed dated 28.09.2011. Thus, the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 are absolute owner and in possession thereof. Their names have been mutated in the revenue record over the said property. O.P. no. 2 (complainant) filed Mutation Appeal no. 12 of 2012 before the court of Additional Collector, Supaul against the said mutation order, which was dismissed and mutation order passed by the Circle Officer, Kishanpur in favour of petitioners was confirmed. Against the said order of Addl. Collector, Supaul, O.P. no. 2 has filed Mutation Case no. 8 of 2013 which is pending disposal. It is further submitted that for declaring the aforesaid property to be of own, O.P. no. 2 has filed Title Suit no. 390 of 2013 against the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 and others which is pending disposal. The O.P. no. 2 has failed to substantiate as to what manipulation or forgery in documents has been committed by the petitioners in procuring the aforesaid property and getting their names mutated over it. It is further submitted that as a Title Suit is pending between the parties Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46506 of 2014 dt.27-07-2018 regarding property in question, hence, the aforesaid order taking cognizance of the offence against the petitioners is nothing but an abuse of process of the Court. So, the impugned order is liable to be quashed.

4. On the other hand, learned APP advocating the correctness and validity of the impugned order has submitted that after correctly appreciating the complaint petition and material available on record, the learned lower court has rightly taken cognizance against the petitioners, which is liable to be upheld and this quashing petition is shorn of merit and is liable to be dismissed.

5. From perusal of record, it appears that O.P. no. 2 (complainant) has filed Complaint Case no. 1230C of 2013 against the petitioners and others with the case in succinct that he along with his cousin has purchased the property in question vide registered sale deed dated 3.09.1970 from one Devan Chaudhary and they are in possession thereof. But the petitioners hatching conspiracy got executed gift deed no. 5979 dated 28.09.2011 regarding property in question besides other property admeasuring 1 bigha, 1 katha, 15 dhur by petitioner no. 3 in favour of the petitioner nos. 1 and 2. On getting information of the same, he obtained certified copy of the gift Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46506 of 2014 dt.27-07-2018 deed and organized Panchayati. The petitioner nos. 1 to 3 admitted their mistake and promised to execute the deed of surrender in favour of the complainant, but they did not keep their promise and got their names mutated over the property in question taking officials of C.O. office, Kishanpur in their collusion. The O.P. no. 2 (complainant) filed Mutation Appeal no. 12 of 2012 before the court of Addl. Collector, Supaul against the said mutation order.

6. From perusal of record, it appears that O.P. no. 2 is claiming the property in question of his own and the petitioners are claiming it of their own by procuring the same in partition by petitioner no. 3 and subsequently gifting the same to her sons petitioner nos. 1 and 2. Admittedly, petitioner nos. 1 and 2 got their names mutated over the property in question. Against the said mutation order, O.P. no. 2 (complainant) filed Mutation Appeal no. 12 of 2012 before the court of Addl. Collector, Supaul which was dismissed and mutation order passed by Circle Officer, Kishanpur in favour of the aforesaid petitioners was confirmed. Against the said dismissal order, the O.P. no. 2 has filed Mutation Case no. 8 of 2013 which is pending disposal. He has also filed Title Suit no. 390 of 2013 against the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 and others inter alia for Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.46506 of 2014 dt.27-07-2018 declaring their title over the property in question and canceling the aforesaid gift deed. In the aforesaid title suit, he has also admitted mutation of the name of the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 over the property in question and dismissal of his Mutation Appeal no. 12 of 2012 by Addl. Collector, Supaul filed against the aforesaid mutation order. Thus, there appears to be complicated question of title involved in the case under hand which is pending disposal in the Civil Court, Supaul.