Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.39256 of 2009 ====================================================== Sri Ram Nagari Sahakari Grih Nirman Samiti Ltd., registration No. 124/82 through at present Secretary Dharmendra Kumar Tiwary, son of late Pashupati Nath Tiwary, resident of Devi Sthan, Punai Chak, P.S. Shastri Nagar, Distt. Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Ram Singhasan Singh, son of late Uddhawa Singh, resident of village Dahibar, P.S. Buxar, Distt. Buxar at present residing at Chandmari Road, P.S. Kankarbagh, Distt. Patna. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.16389 of 2011 ====================================================== Bharat Tripathi, son of Pandit Raghubir Tripathi, resident of Barhara, P.S. Barhara, Distt. Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Ram Singhasan Singh, son of late Uddhawas Singh, resident of village Dahibar, P.S. Buxar, Distt. Buxar, at present resident of Chandmari Road, P.S. Kankarbagh, Distt. Patna. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In Cr.Misc. No.39256 of 2009) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Naseem Yahiya, Adv. For the State : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, A.P.P.
Legal Reasoning
(In Cr.Misc. No.16389 of 2011) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amish Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Raj Kishore Pd., Adv. For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. Tej Bahadur Roy, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER 28 05-07-2013 Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the State. The Petitioners who are the Society and the then Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39256 of 2009 (28) dt.05-07-2013 2/5 Secretary of the Society seek quashing of the entire proceeding including the order dated 23.5.2008 by which the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna, has refused to discharge the Petitioners in Complaint Case No. 697(c) of 2002. They also seek quashing of the order dated 4.8.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. 2, Patna, in Criminal Revision No. 365 of 2008/T.R. No. 59 of 2008 by which he has affirmed such an order. The case of the Complainant is that on invitation from a certain Society, he became a member for allotment of lands by depositing due admission fee in the year 1982. Thereafter, he was intimated that land had been acquired by the Society and he was to deposit Rs.5,000/- per Kattha in the account of the Society. He, accordingly, deposited a sum of Rs.30,000/- between the year 1983-85 for which appropriate receipts were issued by the Secretary of the Society. Thereafter he received a letter dated 25.12.1985 that Plot Nos. 6 and 7 out of Survey Plot No. 237, Khata No. 98 had been allotted to the Complainant. Subsequently, the Complainant was called by the Secretary on 18.2.1986 and the Plot number was changed to 37 and 38, Survey Plot No. 248. Subsequently, he received a letter dated 2.8.1997 by the Secretary intimating him that he was allotted 2400 Square fit out of Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39256 of 2009 (28) dt.05-07-2013 3/5 amalgamated Plot No. 234 but he should not start the construction till such time as the adequate price to the Society is paid and due permission is obtained. The Complainant was also to submit a map of the proposed construction approved by the P.R.D.A. These letters are marked Exbt. 6 and 7 to the Complaint petition. Subsequently, his two daughters also applied to become members of the Cooperative Society after depositing the due fee. However, they were allotted Plots which were disputed property and hence they could not come in possession over the same. Subsequently, the Secretary asked the Complainant to construct a boundary on a piece of land which had never been allotted to him. The Complainant allegedly spent Rs.20,000/- over the construction of concrete piled boundary walls, but the original land-holder, Tej Narayan Singh one day appeared at the spot and stopped the construction of the Complainant. Thereafter, the Complainant approached the Society and he was then allotted Plot Nos. 16, 17 and 18 in his and his daughter’s names. The Secretary also permitted construction on those lands on 28.6.1989. This endorsement is annexed as Annexure IX to the Complaint. On going through the said Annexure, I find that the endorsement on the back of the Plot allotted to the daughter of the Complainant, no where says that Plot Nos. 15, 16 and 17 had been Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39256 of 2009 (28) dt.05-07-2013 4/5 given to the three Society members. The further allegation in the Complaint is that he and his two daughters raised construction over the said land spending an amount of Rs. 40,000/- but abruptly by a letter dated 19.6.1989, the Society asked them to stop the construction. The said letter is annexed as Annexure-X to the Complaint. On going through the said Annexure, I find that the same was issued by the Secretary of the Society but it does not mention the Plot Nos. It states that the land was to be registered on 30.6.1989 and only after the registration of the land the construction could be started. He was, therefore, asked to immediately stop construction on the said Plot. It was submitted that under these circumstances the accused persons should be proceeded against. It appears that the Complainant had filed a case No. 56 of 1988-89 before the District Cooperative Officer, Patna, who took up the matter and passed a decree for realization of the amount deposited by the Complainant along with interests and damages and sent the decree for realization to the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies-cum Certificate Officer, who issued notices to the Complainant through the Senior Cooperative Extension Officer who was also In charge of the Cooperative Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39256 of 2009 (28) dt.05-07-2013 5/5 Societies. The Complainant alleged that the said Officer went in collusion with the accused persons and suppressed the notices. As a consequence, the Complainant could not know about the Certificate Proceeding pending before the Assistant Registrar- cum-Certificate Officer. Presently, the Cooperative Society has stood superseded and dissolved in the year 1989 but in September, 2000 the Secretary was once again reinstated. After re-instating, his wife as a Secretary, the Petitioner was conducting the business himself. A meeting was also held against the conduct of the Secretary. The Complainant submits that the accused had committed the act of cheating and forgery and, therefore, they should be prosecuted. On going through the Complaint petition and Annexures of which I have taken note at the relevant stage, I am of the opinion that no Criminal offence is made out in the facts of the case. Hence, the application is allowed and the entire proceeding including the order dated 23.5.2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna, in Complaint Case No. 697(c) of 2002 is, hereby quashed. S.Ali (Anjana Prakash, J)