CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS 1588 of 2005 on 21 September 2002

O R D E R

S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1588/2005

Ram Lal vs. State of Rajasthan

Date of Order ::::: February 18,2009Present HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BHANWAROO KHAN

Mr. D.S.Shekhawat for the petitionerMr. Javed Chaudhary, P.P.

A complaint was filed by the petitioner RamLal in the court of Additional Chief JudicialMagistrate, Srimadhopur against Gheesaram, Smt.Chuki, Mansingh, Surjaram and Khemaram forcommission of offence under Sections 420, 467,468, 471 and 379 IPC with the averments that theaccused persons taking benefit of mental diseaseof his father Surja Ram got a gift deed executedin respect of the land of Khasra Nos.162 and 167and also withdrew cash amount of Rs.1,50,000/-from the bank account of Surja Ram by committingtheft of pass-book. This complaint was sent topolice station Shrimadhopur for investigationunder Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The police after investigation submitted a negative final reportin the matter. The petitioner filed a protestpetition and examined his witnesses. The Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate after recordingstatements of the petitioner and his witnessescame to this conclusion that it was a case ofcivil nature and prima facie no case for thealleged offence is made out. Therefore, Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated21.9.2002 dismissed the complaint. Against thisorder the petitioner filed a revision before theAddl. Sessions Judge, Neemka thana which was alsodismissed vide judgment dated 8.6.2005. Hence,this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Perusal of the statements of the

complainant, his witnesses and the impugnedorders clearly reveals that a false case has beenlodged by the petitioner taking it to be grantedthat his father was mentally ill and the accusedpersons got the gift deed executed in theirfavour. No complaint was ever lodged by Surja Ramin this respect. The trial court found that therewere civil transactions between the parties.Having regard to the facts and circumstances ofthe case it is found that the courts below haverightly arrived at the conclusion that the matter involved a civil dispute. The impugned orders donot bear any illegality or error of law so asthe require interference by this Court in theexercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section482 Cr.P.C. The petition lacks merit, deserves tobe dismissed.

Consequently, the misc. petition stands

dismissed.

Office is directed to return the record ofthe case to the concerned court.

(Bhanwaroo Khan),J.

bairwa