Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:11173 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 178 of 2025 Ayesha Siddiqua D/o Mohd. Idrish Aged About 50 Years R/o Eac Colony, Opposite- Khalsa School, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) versus --- Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Thorugh- The Police Station-In-Charge, Police Station- Pandri, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.). --- Non-applicant Along with MCRCA No. 189 of 2025 Dadun Shah S/o Late Daddu Shah Aged About 50 Years R/o. Amnaltas Puram, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari (C.G.) Versus ---Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Thorugh- The Police Station-In-Charge, Police Station- Pandri, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.). --- Non-applicant RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI Along with MCRCA No. 198 of 2025 Ashish Shinde S/o Late Sudhakar Rao Shinde Aged About 36 Years R/o 404, Ryal Apartment, Lodhipara, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Versus ---Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Thorugh- The Police Station-In-Charge, Police Station- Pandri, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.). ---Non-applicant 2 Along with MCRCA No. 200 of 2025 Noor Begam D/o Moh. Yaqub Aged About 53 Years R/o. E- 68, Aishwarya Kingdom, Kachna, Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur (C.G.). Versus ---Applicant State of Chhattisgarh Thorugh- The Police Station-In-Charge, Police Station- Pandri, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.). ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Advocate as well as Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. UKS Chandel, Dy. Advocate General. For Objectors : Mr. Shahid Siddhiqui, Advocate, Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate, Ms. Vedagni Jangde, Advocate, and Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.03.2025 1. These anticipatory bail applications under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 05/2025 registered at Police Station – Pandri, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that a written complaint has been filed on 05.01.2025 by the complainant alleging inter alia that the offence has been committed from the period from 15.08.2014 to 14.12.2023, wherein the property belonging to her late husband namely Mohd. Yunus, who died on 15.08.2014, has been grabbed by the applicants by executing a forged Batwaranama, wherein her signatures have been 3 obtained by coercion. Hence, this application. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the FIR has been falsely implicating the applicants at the instance of the land mafia involved in the area, with an ulterior motive to exert undue influence upon her and coercing her to succumb to their demand of selling her family property at a throw away price, and the applicant had filed various complaints regarding undue harassment made to her and threat of false implications. It is further submitted that it is an admitted fact that the applicants (Namely, Ayesha Siddiqua, Dadun Shah, and Ashish Shinde) are not beneficiary under the registered Batwaranama executed amongst the applicants (representing the estate of Mohd. Yunus), two brothers (Mohd Idrish and Mohd. Sofi) and 05 sisters (Khatun Bi, Noorjahan Begam, Sabra Begam, Noor Begam and Shahjadi Begam), where Noor Jahan was represented through her heirs and Sabra Begam died issueless, and the factum is established by the recitals of deed duly registered on 10.03.2017, and a copy of the registered deed dated 10.03.2017 is filed with the bail applications as Annexure-A/3. It is further submitted that the story of the complainant is not palatable even with the pinch of salt as the complainant herself is an Advocate and therefore the question of causing coercion to her, which persisted even when she has sworn afÏdavit relying on the said Batwaranama before the different judicial foras is false and afterthrough and pretentious. 4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that it is an admitted fact that the applicant, namely, Noor Bagam has paid a sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- under the same Batwaranama as a consideration for relinquishment of all the claim of the complainant against any of the 4 property of Mohd. Sharif, and the same fact is also apparent from the documents filed with the bail applications. It is also submitted that the dispute between the parties are purely civil in nature, and no any civil suit has been filed by the complainant against the applicant in connection with the present dispute. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that a written complaint has been filed on 05.01.2025 by the complainant alleging inter alia that the offence has been committed from the period from 15.08.2014 to 14.12.2023, wherein the property belonging to her late husband namely Mohd. Yunus, who died on 15.08.2014, has been grabbed by the applicants by executing a forged Batwaranama, wherein her signatures have been obtained by coercion. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in this case. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the Objectors opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants and submitted that the objector is the widow of Mohammad Sarif who died on 15/08/2014. It is undisputed fact that during the life time of Mohammad Sarif, the Mohammad Sarif was the sole owner of property situated at Village- Mowa, P.H.No.32, R.I. Circle- Raipur-1, Tahsil and District- Raipur (C.G.) bearing Khasra No.206, 255, 260, 261, 262/2, 266 (267), 295, 302/2, 788, 797, 798 (799), 801/2, 802, 808/2, 814/1, 851, 886/6, 891, 895 total area of 5.513 hectare. It is further submitted that after the death of Mohammad Sarif, the objector who is the wife of Late Mohammad Sarif has filed an application before the Tahsildar, Raipur for mutation of the name in the land of the husband of the objector in which one of the accused Noor Begum, Shajadi Begum and father of the accused 5 namely, Ayesha Siddhiqua has raised an objection with respect to the mutation of the land in the name of the Objector, but later on Noor Begum and Shajadi Begum has withdrawn the objection filed before the Tahsildar, Raipur, but the father of Ayesha Siddhiqua has contested the case, however, the Tahsildar, Raipur has passed the order to file the civil suit. It is further submitted that in the year, 2017 all the brothers and sisters of the husband of the objector have prepared a partition deed in which the objector was impleaded as agreed person and as per this partition deed, Rs. 2,00,00,000/- will be given to the Objector and the Objector will relinquish all the right and title over the joint and sole ownership properties including the land of the Husband of the Objector, but till date neither any amount has been paid to the Objector and the entire property of the husband of the Objector has been grabbed by the accused persons by creating a forged will in favour of accused Noor Begum and on the basis of the forged will, a forged gift deed of the land has been executed by the accused persons. It is further submitted that after the execution of the partition deed, the Objector has requested so many times to the accused persons for the payment of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- as they are enjoying the fruits of the property of the Husband of the Objector, but since from the very inception, the accused has the intention and knowledge to cheat the Objector, therefore, no amount has been given to the Objector and to Grab the property of the Husband of the Objector, the accused persons in collusion with each other and doing the criminal conspiracy has not paid the amount to the Objector and when the Objector inquired about the will and got it examined from the Handwriting Expert, the Objector came to know that in order to grab the property of the Husband of the Objector, since the value of the property of the Husband of the Objector is at present more than 50 6 Crores. It is further submitted that the entire land of the Husband of the Objector is more than 50 crores and the accused has the intention and knowledge to cheat the Objector, therefore, the accused person in furtherance of their Criminal Conspiracy has sold the property in less price than the market value of the property and thereafter, the accused persons have sold the property to other persons in Crores. When all these facts have been came to the knowledge of the Objector that the accused have committed a scam of more than 50 Crores by creating a forged documents in order to cheat the Objector and deprived the Objector from the property of the Husband of the Objector, the Objector has lodged the criminal case against the applicants and the FIR has been registered against the accused persons. The Objector is a widow and having limited source of income, is fighting for the legal right over the property of the Husband of the Objector which has been grabbed by the accused persons by committing forgery, cheating and creating false and fabricated documents and thereby depriving the Objector to enjoy the fruits of the property of the husband of the Objector in which the Objector is the Legal Owner of the property. The facts afore stated it is apparent that if the anticipatory bail will be granted to the applicants, they will misuse the same and may commit the offence. 7. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, and from the perusal of the case diary it transpires that it is an admitted fact that the applicants (Namely, Ayesha Siddiqua, Dadun Shah, and Ashish Shinde) are not beneficiary under the registered Batwaranama executed amongst the 7 applicants (representing the estate of Mohd. Yunus), two brothers (Mohd Idrish and Mohd. Sofi) and 05 sisters (Khatun Bi, Noorjahan Begam, Sabra Begam, Noor Begam and Shahjadi Begam), where Noor Jahan was represented through her heirs and Sabra Begam died issueless, and the factum is established by the recitals of deed duly registered on 10.03.2017, and a copy of the registered deed dated 10.03.2017 is filed with the bail applications as Annexure-A/3, and it is an admitted fact that the applicant, namely, Noor Bagam has paid a sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- under the same Batwaranama as a consideration for relinquishment of all the claim of the complainant against any of the property of Mohd. Sharif, and the same fact is also apparent from the documents filed with the bail applications, the dispute between the parties are purely civil in nature, and no any civil suit has been filed by the complainant against the applicant in connection with the present dispute, at this stage without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 9. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants – Ayesha Siddiqua, Dadun Shah, Ashish Shinde and Noor Begam on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicants shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The Applicants shall appear before the trial Court on 8 each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d)The Applicants and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicants shall not involve themself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Rajshekhar