ORDER :

1. 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.140 of 2017 registered with Kamrej Police Station, Surat Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and the proceedings initiated in pursuant thereto.

2. Under the instructions of this Court, learned Advocate Ms. Rashmiben D. Gadhavi is assisted by learned Advocate Mr. Kishankumar R. Maurya though learned Advocate Mr. Maurya had withdrawn his representation on behalf of the respondent No.2.

3. Learned Advocate for the applicant Ms. Kruti M. Shah submits that as per the complainant, his deceased father had three brothers. The deceased father was the eldest, thereafter Arunbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel who stays at Canada, the next brother being Mahendrabhai and the youngest being Kiranbhai, are residing at America. As per learned Advocate Ms. Shah, the complainant is the nephew of Arunbhai, who avers that Arunbhai has legal right, interest and share in the land bearing Block No.228, Revenue Survey No.252 admeasuring 1 hectare 90 RA and 20 sq. metres which is approximately 8 bighas of land at Village Velanja, Kamrej. It is stated that Arunbhai had executed the power of attorney in his favour and he being the power of attorney had filed a complaint on 28.05.2017 against the other uncle – Kiranbhai and the present applicant who is the purchaser of the land – Mahendrasinh Kanaksinh Thakore.

4. As per the complainant, the said land was purchased from Chimanbahi C. Patel, resident of Velanja, Taluka Kamrej by Registered Sale Deed No.310 dated 07.03.1987 by Arunbhai and his uncles Mahendrabhai and Kiranbhai and accordingly, Revenue Survey No.1847 was mutated on 15.09.1993, and was certified by the Circle Officer, and thus in this way, all the 3 brothers became the owner of the said land.

5. It is the case of the complainant that on 26.06.1987 his uncle Arunbhai had executed the power of attorney in favour of his other uncle Kiranbhai at Canada to deal with the property and to give the share to his wife. Learned Advocate Ms. Shah submits that the complainant alleges that Kiranbhai had misused the power and sold off the land to Mahendrasinh Kanaksinh Thakore by executing a Registered Sale Deed No.1224 dated 22.10.1993 and in the said documents, Kiranbhai is the power of attorney holder of Arunbhai and Mahendrabhai. It is submitted that the First Information Report has been filed on the ground that the Sale documents on which the uncle Kiranbhai has signed as power of attorney of Arunbhai is forged and bogus and thus has cheated and committed breach of trust and hence, Arunbhai has been cheated of his share of the land and on 22.10.1993, the date on which the documents were executed, the uncle Arunbhai was staying in Canada. It is further submitted that the First Information Report is lodged on the premise that the power of attorney executed by the uncle Arunbhai in favour of another uncle Kiranbhai has no reference of the Sale and the power has been misused which speaks of criminal conspiracy. It is thus submitted that by creating forged documents in his support, the uncle Kiranbhai has used it to be true and has illegally used the same to deal with the property on his other uncle Arunbhai. Learned Advocate Ms. Shah thus states that the Registered Sale Deed is not a forged document since no ingredients of Sections 463 and 464 of the Indian Penal Code are attracted. For the power of attorney, learned Advocate Ms. Shah contended that it is the Civil Court which will interpret the document as per the Contract Act and thus urged to quash the First Information Report and subsequent proceedings.

6. Countering the above arguments, learned Advocate Ms. Rashmiben D. Gadhvi assisted by learned Advocate Mr. Kishankumar D. Maurya contended that the power of attorney executed in favour of Kiranbhai by