A legal practitioner must verify client identities and cannot evade liability for facilitating fraud in legal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

[Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.]

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of both sides, heard finally.

2. Heard Mr. Rajendrraa Deshmukh, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Ms. Deshmukh, the learned APP for the State at length.

3. By the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner/Original Accused No.2 takes exception to the order dated 28.07.2022 passed by the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Cri. Revision No. 83 of 2019, thereby affirmed the order dated 22.04.2019 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalgaon, in Regular Criminal Case No. 494 of 2011, whereby directed to frame charge against the present Petitioner/Accused for the offence punishable under Section 119, 120, 166, 167, 171, 181, 182, 192, 193, 196, 198, 199, 205, 419, 420, 422, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 and 120-B of the I.P.C.

4. Facts giving rise to the present petition are that on 03.12.2010, the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Jalgaon received a written complaint from one Shri Prakash Gulabrao Patil, wherein he alleged that the original claimant Shri Chindna Krishna Mang in land acquisition reference proceeding bearing Misc. Civil Application No.47/1993, registered as LAR No.262/1993 died on 22.11.1999 but his legal heirs were not brought on record, however, but the Accused No.1 impersonated himself as the Original Claimant and received the amount of compensation due to acquisition of land of the Original Claimant Shri Chindna Krishna Mang and deprived the legal heirs of Original Claimant to receive the compensation in respect of the acquired land. Therefore, the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge directed the learned CJSD to conduct an enquiry and to submit it’s report.

5. Accordingly, the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Jalgaon conducted an enquiry and examined the record and submitted it’s report. As per the inquiry report, the Accused No.1- Sukhdeo Krishna Suralkar and the Petitioner/Accused No.2 in connivance with each other committed fraud on the Court to receive the enhanced compensation. Though, the present Petitioner was duly served with the show cause notice on 07.03.2011 and was called upon him to submit his explanation but he failed to submit his reply. So also, the present Petitioner has identified the fictitious person in all the three Court proceedings. Therefore, act done by the Accused No.1- Sukhdeo Krishna Suralkar (Mang) and Accused No.2 (present Petitioner) for falsification of Court record, playing fraud upon the Court, cheating in the Court proceeding and obtaining the Judgment in the name of a deceased person and getting benefits for themselves.

6. In pursuance of said report, the Complainant Shri Kishor Rajeshwarrao Chaudhari, the then CJSD, Jalgaon filed a Regular Criminal Case No.494/2011 for the offence punishable under Section 119, 120, 166, 167, 171, 181, 182, 192, 193, 196, 198, 199, 205, 419, 420, 422, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 and 120-B of the I.P.C. After due compliance of Section 202 of the Cr.P.C., the learned Judicial Magistrate, issued process against both the Petitioner as well as Accused No.1 Shri Sukhdeo Krishna Suralkar for the said offences. In compliance of service of summons, the present Petitioner appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate.

7. The prosecution examined PW1-Kishor Rajeshwarrao Chaudhari (CW1) at Exh.57 and Shri Vilas Wamanrao Jahagirdar (CW2) before framing of charge. After recording evidence charge and having been heard both the sides, on 22.04.2019, the learned CJM, Jalgaon passed an order holding that the material available on record is sufficient to frame charge against the Petitioner and Accused No.1- Shri Sukhdeo Krishna Suralkar for the offence punishabe under Section 119, 120, 166, 167, 171, 181, 182, 192, 193, 196, 198, 199, 205, 419, 420, 422, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 and 120-B of the I.P.C.

8. Being aggriev