JUDGMENT

Vibha Kankanwadi, J. (Oral) - Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard both the sides for final disposal.

2. Present application has been filed by original accused persons by invoking inherent powers of this Court under section 482 of Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 for quashing and setting aside the First Information Report bearing Crime No. II - 1 / 2015, registered with Ashvi Police Sation Tq. Sangamner Dist. Ahmednagar and also the charge-sheet based upon the said FIR bearing No. 13 of 2015, dated 27-10-2015.

3. The applicants have come with a case that, the said FIR came to be lodged as per the directions given by learned Magistrate, Sangamner under section 156 (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the basis of private complaint lodged by present respondent No.2. It is stated that, there is dispute between the parties in respect of landed properties bearing Gut No. 78 and 31 situated at village Panodi. Original owner of the said land was one Manohar Kadam. He had five sons namely Keru, Tabaji, Nana, Madhukar and Bhaskar. Tabaji is the father of respondent No.2. After the demise of Manohar, Bhaskar filed Regular Civil Suit No. 207 of 2003 for partition and separate possession of the lands. The suit came to be partly allowed by Judgment and decree dated 28-01-2008. It was declared that each one of the brother is having 8 / 42th share in the properties. As per the said decree Keru Kadam got 55 R land in Gut No.78 whereas Nana got 54 R land in Gut No.78 and 3 1/2 R land in Gut No.31. Mutation entry No. 2682 came to be effected in the revenue records to that effect. Thereafter vide registered sale deed dated 21-06-2011 Keru sold his 55 R land to one of the applicant namely Babasaheb Talekar, and thereafter Nana sold his 3 1/2 R land in Gut No.31 to Babasaheb by registered sale deed dated 04-02- 2012. Nana also sold his 54 R land from Gut No.78 in favour of applicant Tarabai Talekar and Bharat Talekar on 04-02-2012. On the date of the respective sale deeds all of them were given possession of those lands. Mutation entry to that effect was taken, however it was objected by Bhaskar. The objection was decided in favour of the applicants. The complainant in order to harass the applicants, filed Regular Civil Suit No. 613 of 2012 claiming declaration that the decree passed in Regular Civil suit No. 207 of 2003 is not binding on him and also setting aside the sale deeds executed in favour of the applicants. In the said suit, the applicants filed counter claim claiming injunction against the complainant and also filed application for temporary injunction. During the pendency of the said proceeding it is alleged that the complainant and his family members assaulted the applicants on 24-05-2014 and non-cognizable offence was registered against them. A story was concocted by the complainant and he tried to lodge complaint against the applicants alleging that the applicants had assaulted him and his family members and abused in a name of caste. Crime No. 17 of 2014 came to be registered under Section 324, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, charge-sheet is filed and the trial is pending. In the suit filed by the complainant Keru and Nana who are the vendors of the applicant are also parties and they have filed their written statement raising contention in favour of applicants. Applicants who are the purchasers are in possession of the land in question. Still the complainant has come with a false story and lodged private complaint bearing M.A. No.437 of 2014 in which directions are given for investigation under section 156 (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is alleged that, since 2009 the applicants are harassing him and his family members and it is stated that the applicants physically attacked the complainant and his family with deadly weapons on 24-05-2014. In fact when the charge-sheet is already filed in respect of the incident, the second crime cannot be registered. T