Back
High Court Of Delhi
MISRI LAL - Appellant
Versus
TOLA RAM - Respondent
Decided On : 10/31/1983
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - Section 195(b)(ii) and (iii) - Complaint - Cognizance - Tehsildar of DDA - Not a Court - Mutation Proceedings - Not a Judicial Proceeding - No Bar to Taking Cognizance of Offences Based on Complaint by Tehsildar or DDA.
Fact of the Case:
A complaint was filed alleging forgery, fraud, and use of forged documents as genuine in mutation proceedings before the Tehsildar of DDA. The accused challenged the cognizance taken by the court, arguing that the Tehsildar was a "court" under Section 195(b)(ii) and (iii) of the CrPC and that the complaint should have been filed by the Tehsildar or DDA.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Tehsildar of DDA was not a "court" within the meaning of Section 195(b)(ii) and (iii) of the CrPC. The court noted that the Tehsildar did not have the authority to make evidence on oath or to give a final decision in the matter, which are essential characteristics of a court. The court also noted that the mutation proceedings were not judicial proceedings, as they did not determine rights or have any finality.
Issues: 1. Whether the Tehsildar of DDA is a "court" within the meaning of Section 195(b)(ii) and (iii) of the CrPC? 2. Whether the mutation proceedings before the Tehsildar were judicial proceedings?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Tehsildar of DDA was not a "court" within the meaning of Section 195(b)(ii) and (iii) of the CrPC because: - The Tehsildar did not have the authority to make evidence on oath. - The Tehsildar did not have the authority to give a final decision in the matter. 2. The court held that the mutation proceedings before the Tehsildar were not judicial proceedings because: - The mutation proceedings did not determine rights. - The mutation proceedings did not have any finality.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the accused's challenge to the cognizance taken by the court. The court held that the complaint was not barred under Section 195(b)(ii) and (iii) of the CrPC, as the Tehsildar of DDA was not a "court" and the mutation proceedings were not judicial proceedings.
( 1 ) THIS petition u/s. 482 of the Cr. P. C. is directed against proceedings on a complaint based on allegations of fraud, forgery and use of forged documents as genuine and the order of the trial court framing charge against the petitioner, among others.
( 2 ) THE petition has been filed in the following circumstances. Property No. 2986- 87, in Gali No. 39, Beadonpura, Karol Bagh, at one time belonged to one Ladu Ram. By a deed of mortgage of 7. 1. 1948, which was duly registered (Ex. Public Witness 6/1), Ladu Ram, mortgaged the said property, without possession, in favour of one Lalu Ram. Ladu Ram died on 8. 7. 1973 and until then, the mortgage had neither been redeemed nor redemption was foreclosed. It was until then not subject-matter of any proceedings either. By a legal notice of 11. 4. 1974, heirs of Ladu Ram, namely, his wife his son Tota Ram and his daughters, sought redemption of the property and, inter alia, claimed delivery of possession of it contending that it was a mortgage with possession and that the possession of the property had been delivered to Lalu Ram, the mortgage. In reply to this, Counsel for Lalu Ram, claimed by his notice of May 12, 1974, Ex. Public Witness. 7/4, that
"ladu Ram could not pay off the mortgage money and interest was accumulating. He, therefore, relinquished the title and possession of the property "to Lalu Ram". It was further claimed that Ganga Ram, son of Lalu Ram, had since been in exclusive possession of the property and the house-tax etc. was also being paid by the said Ganga Ram on behalf of Lalu Ram and that the rights of Ladu Ram in the property "stood extinguished by the lapse of time. " It was further alleged in the reply that the notice to which it was a reply had been sent because the value of the property had since increased. There was no further correspondence between the parties. Lalu Ram died in March 1976. He was survived by three sons, Ganga Ram, Mohar Singh and Misri Lal, and two daughters. It is alleged that in May, 1978, the heirs of Ladu Ram discovered that Ganga Ram and Misri Lal, in conspiracy with one Jawaharlal, Puran Chand and certain others forged a document purporting to be the will of Ladu Ram, bequeathing the mortgaged property in favour of Ganga Ram and Misri Lal. The Will is said to have been executed on June 5, 1973 and purported to have been attested by Jawaharlal and Puran Chand, aforesaid. It was further alleged that on the basis of the aforesaid forged document and pursuant to the aforesaid conspiracy, Ganga Ram and Misri Lal got the property mutated in their favour in the records of the DDA in 1974. The matter was reported to the police on or about 26. 7. 1978. The police did not take any action and consequently on 11. 8. 1978, Tota Ram, respondent in the present petition, filed a complaint in the Magistrate s court alleging offences, u/ss. 420/468/471/34 Indian Penal Code. on the basis of the aforesaid allegations. It was further alleged in the complaint that false statements of certain persons were recorded in the proceedings before the Tehsildar of D. D. A. , who impersonated as the heirs of Ladu Ram. It Is further alleged that on the basis of this material, a mutation order was made on 11. 1. 1974 in favour of Ganga Ram and Misri Lal. On perusal of the complaint and the statement of the complainant and the other material before him, the learned Magistrate summoned the accused persons and by an order of 22. 1. 1983, directed that a charge for offences u/ss. 420/471 read with section 34 Indian Penal Code be framed against Misri Lal, the petitioner in the present proceedings, and two others, Jawaharlal and Puran Chand, Ganga Ram having since died on May 4, 1982. In course of the order, justifying farming of charge, learned Magistrate inter alia, relied on the denial of Tota Rani, the complainant, his mother and sister that they ever went to the office of the D. D. A, or made any statement, the disappearance of the records of Tehs
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
