ORDER :

1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent – State and learned Advocate Mr. D.A. Sankhesara waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent No.2.

2. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing and setting aside the First Information Report bearing I-C.R. No.24 of 2016 registered with Vadali Police Station, Sabarkantha for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and the proceedings initiated in pursuant thereto. The applicant herein is aged about 80 years who has been arraigned as an accused No.2 in the above First Information Report.

3. Learned Advocate for the applicant Mr. Jigar G. Gadhavi submits that the above First Information Report is absolutely false, frivolous, vexatious, concoted and is filed with an ulterior motive coupled with malacious and fake allegations. It is submitted that the complainant is the daughter of Vankar Haribhai Dhulabhai from whom the present applicant had purchased the property bearing Survey No.3, Part No.4, admeasuring 1 acre and 18 gunthas with a well after payment of the due consideration and the possession of the land was handed over to the applicant on the very same day when registration of the Sale Deed was on 26.06.1981. It is further submitted that with registration of the Sale Deed before the Sub-Registrar, Idar, the right was granted to the applicant to get his name mutated in the Government revenue records but since Vankar Haribhai Dhulabhai expired on 06.04.1984, the necessary process of mutation could not be concluded and hence, the heirs of the deceased were required to give consent to the present applicant for getting his name entered in the revenue record. It is also submitted that the allegations are levelled by the daughter of the deceased against her brother – Dahyabhai Haribhai Vankar. By an order of this Court dated 20.08.2019 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.8375 of 2016, the First Information Report qua the brother came to be quashed and all the consequential proceedings arising out of the said First Information Report were also ordered to be quashed. It is further submitted by learned Advocate Mr. Jigar G. Gadhavi that by way of the Sale Deed, the name of the present applicant was required to be mutated, so to delete the name of the complainant and her sister - Alkhiben, brother – Dahyabhai, an affidavit cum declaration on 04.07.2012 was prepared; however, it is alleged that the thumb impression of the complainant as well as the sister are forged. Further allegations are also made to the effect that the said forged documents were used and the legal rights of the complainant came to be deleted from the revenue records, to which learned Advocate Mr. Jigar Gadhavi submitted that the mutation was effected vide Entry No.2889 on 05.07.2012 and against that entry, it is submitted that the complainant had filed RTS Appeal No.90/2014 before the learned Deputy Collector, Idar and by an order dated 05.12.2014, the Entry No.2889 dated 05.07.2012 was ordered to be certified. Thereafter, qua a private complaint, initially an order was passed under Section 210 of the Code, a report was called from the concerned police wherein it was concluded that there was no criminality to the complaint.

4. Learned Advocate for the applicant Mr. Jigar S. Gadhvi has relied upon the Report dated 07.07.2015 of the Vadali Police Station with Javak Entry No.971 of 2015 to submit that the sister of the complainant – Alkhiben before the police had given a statement and even the statement of witness Anilbhai Jayantibhai Valad was recorded by the police and according to them, there was no forgery, rather Alkhiben confirmed the fact that during the time of executing the Affidavit for pedigree, she had put her signature and in the same way, witness – Anilbhai Jayantibhai Valad has also affirmed his signature as a