1. The two petitions being Special Criminal Application No.1157 of 2012 and Special Criminal Application No.1283 of 2012 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Article 226 of the Constitution of India are taken out against criminal complaint / FIR registered as I CR No.86/2012 which is registered at Patan Taluka Police Station. The petitioners, in the said two petitions, have prayed that:

Special Criminal Application No.1157 of 2012

“(15)(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to quash and set aside criminal complaint being C.R. No.I86 of 2012 registered at Patan Taluka Police Station, Dist. Patan (at ANNEXUREA hereto) and all further proceedings arising of the said F.I.R.;”

Special Criminal Application No.1283 of 2012

“(13)(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to quash and set aside criminal complaint being C.R. No.I86 of 2012 registered at Patan Taluka Police Station, Dist. Patan (at ANNEXUREA hereto) and all further proceedings arising of the said F.I.R.;”

1.1. So far as third petition, i.e. Special Criminal Application No.1535 of 2012 is concerned, the petitioner is the complainant and he has prayed, inter alia, that:

“14(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to transfer the investigation in the matter arising out of FIR being C.R. No.I86/2012 registered at Patan Taluka Police Station, Dist. Patan by higher authority not below the rank of District Superintendent of Police or such other investigating agency as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience.”

With reference to the said third petition being Special Criminal Application No.1535 of 2012, it is relevant and necessary to mention that the said petition is also taken out in connection with and with reference to the very same complaint/FIR, i.e. I CR No.86/2012 which is the subject matter of the above mentioned two petitions. However, it is relevant to mention that the said petition is taken out by the complainant, i.e. the respondent in the other two petitions. The other difference between this third petition being Special Criminal Application No.1535 of 2012 and the said two petitions being Special Criminal Application No.1157 of 2012 and Special Criminal Application No.1283 of 2012, is that the petitioner in petition being Special Criminal Application No.1535 of 2012 (who is respondent in two petitions and is the complainant) has prayed for transfer of investigation in connection with the complaint/FIR being I CR No.86/2012, whereas the petitioners in the above mentioned two petitions have prayed that the said complaint may be quashed.

1.2. Learned advocate for the petitioners in the two petitions, viz. Special Criminal Application No.1157 of 2012 and Special Criminal Application No.1283 of 2012 have made common submissions while the respondent in the said two petitions – who is the petitioner in the third petition, viz. Special Criminal Application No.1535 of 2012 has made submissions supporting his petition and opposing the other two petitions. However, since the said three petitions arise from, and are preferred in connection with the same FIR/complaint, the petitions are heard together and are decided by this common order.

2. Respondent No.2 who is the original complainant, has filed the written complaint / FIR on 8.4.2012, alleging offence under Sections 447, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 114 of IPC.

3. Since the respondent complainant is common in both petitions and the complaint / FIR against which the two petitions are preferred is also same and since learned counsel for the petitioners and the private respondent have made common submissions and raised common contentions, both petitions are heard together and are decided by this common order.

4. The complainant – informant of the impugned FIR is son of original owner of the land which is subject matter of the dispute and allegations mentioned in the impugned FIR. The crux of the allegations made by the complainant is that the accused persons have, by way of