LexRAM BIRAJI DEVI AND ANR. versus UMESH KUMAR SINGH AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
RAM BIRAJI DEVI AND ANR. A V. UMESH KUMAR SINGH AND ANR. MAY 11, 2006 [ASHOK BHAN AND LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, JJ.] B Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 482-Quashing of Complaint/FIR-Dispute in respect of sale and purchase of land-Complaint under sections 406, 419, 420 and 120-B /PC alleging that the seller after accepting the consideration amount refused to transfer the plot to the complainant-purchaser-Cognizance taken by the Magistrate-Petition under section 482 Cr.P.C seeking quashing of cognizance-Dismissal by High Court-On appeal held: Dispute amounts to civil liability inter se the parties-No prima facie case was made out by complainant-purchaser against the seller involving them in the commission of the alleged offence- Cognizance taken by the Magistrate was an abuse of process of Court-This is a case of extreme exception where High Court should have exercised its inherent jurisdiction and power to quash FIR-Thus, thelc:omplaint and the cognizance of offence taken liable to be quashed-Penal Code, 1860- Sections 406, 419, 420 and 120 B. Trisuns Chemical Industry v. Rajesh Agarwal & Ors., (1999] 8 SCC 686, distinguished. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 632 of 2006. From the Judgment and Order dated 13.1.2005 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Cr!. Misc. No. 11930 of 2004. Braj Kishore Mishra for Ms. Aparna Jha for the Appellants. Tarkeshwar Nath, P.K.Mishra, K.K. Rai, Ranjan, K. Pandey and Gopal Singh for the Respondents. The Order of the Court was delivered by LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, J. : Special leave granted. This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 13. 1.2005 passed by the c D E F G High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Misc. No. 11930 of 2004 H 329 A B c D E F G H 330 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. dismissing the petition filed by the appellants under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. seeking quashing of the o~der dated 8.8.2003 of the Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, in Complaint Case No.298/2003 - T.R. No.80812003. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Complainant Umesh Kumar Singh - respondent No. I herein, filed a complaint against the appellants before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, inter alia alleging that Smt. Ram Biraji Devi appellant No. I herein, was allotted MIG Plot No. M- 27 situated in Housing Board Colony, Gaya. In July 2002, both the appellants represented to the complainant that they were badly in need of money and wanted to transfer the allotted plot to some person interested to purchase the said plot. The complainant expressed his willingness to purchase the plot. It was alleged that the parties orally agreed that the complainant would pay to the appellants a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs as price of the plot and on payment of the said amount, the appellants would transfer the plot in favour of the complainant. It was also alleged that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.80,000/- to the appellants as consideration amount of the sale price of the plot on different dates between 15.7.2000 and 15.12.2002. The appellants alleged to have made promises to the complainant that they would execute a written agreement in favour of the complainant on 15.1.2003, but since they failed to execute the agreement on 20.12003, the complainant along with three other persons went to the house of the appellants and enquired about the reason for delay in execution of the agreement. The appellants flatly denied acceptance of Rs.80,000/- and refused to transfor the plot in favour of the complainant. On the basis of the above premise, a criminal complaint dated nil came to be filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, against the appellants. It appears from the record that Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gaya, recorded the statements of the complainant and his witnesses on 19.4.2003 and thereupon took cognizance of the offences under Sections 406, 419, 420 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code vide order dated 8.8.2003. Being aggrieved against the order of taking of the cognizance by the Judicial Magistrate the appellants approached the High Court of Patna under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. praying for quashing of the cognizance taken by the Magistrate. The High Court by the impugned order dated 13.1.2005 dismissed the said petition. Hence, this appeal by way of special kave. -q RAM BIRAJI DEVI v. UMESH KUMAR SINGH [PANTA, J.] 331 We have heard learned counsel for the par
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.