Filing an FIR after extensive delay without merit constitutes abuse of law and does not establish a prima facie offense.

ORDER :

J. C. DOSHI, J.

1 By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “CrPC), petitioners prayed following reliefs:

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to quash and set aside F.I.R. being C.R. No.I-37 of 2014 registered at Karjan Police Station, Vadodara (Rural) (at ANNEXURE-A hereto) as well as all consequential proceedings pursuant to the aforesaid F.I.R.;

(B) During pendency and final disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay further proceedings/ investigation of F.I.R. being C.R. No.I-37 of 2014 registered at Karjan Police Station, Vadodara (Rural) (at ANNEXURE-A hereto);

(C) Pass any such other and/or further orders that may be thought just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present case;”

2 The brief facts of the case are as under:

2.1 One Ambalalbhai Bhatt, common ancestor, was survived by two sons namely, Ratilalbhai and Ramanlalbhai as well as three daughters, namely, Radhaben, Savitaben and Lakshmiben. The complainant is the son of late Ratilalbhai. He, along with Manjulaben and Shardaben, are heirs of the deceased Ratilalbhai. Another son of deceased Ambalalbhai’s late Ramanlalbhai, he is survived by late Bhailalbhai, further survived by his two sons namely, Navinbhai and Madhusudanbhai and daughter Kapilaben. Navinbhai and Madhusudanbhai are the accused nos.1 and 2 in the FIR. Ambalalbhai was holding ancestral land in Village: Chorbhuj as well as Samlod. According to the FIR, the land bearing Block No. 45 and 3585 of Khata No. 140 belongs to late Ambalalbhai. However, the accused nos.1 and 6, namely, Navinchandra Bhailalbhai Bhatt and Talati-cum-Mantri Narsitsinh Mavsinh Parmar, fabricated and concocted the Sammati-Patrak of the complainant and witness Manjulaben, also false the signature on the Notice under Section 135(D) of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, got mutated the aforesaid land vide Revenue Entry No.1284 dated 13^th September, 1983 and subsequent Revenue Entry No.1340 dated 13^th July, 1984 in favor of accused nos.2 to 5, have taken away and grabbed the land where the complainant has undivided share.

2.2 With the aforesaid allegation, FIR bearing CR No. I-37 of 2014 was filed with the Karjan Police Station, Vadodara (Rural), on 14^th February, 2014 for the offence punishable under Sections 406,420,461,467,468,471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( for short “IPC”). Hence, this petition at the instance of accused nos.1 to 5.

3 At the outset, the learned advocate Mr. P. P. Majmudar, appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner no.2, Rakshaben Madhusudanben Bhatt, has passed away long back ago. Mr. P. P. Majmudar, the learned advocate for the petitioner, submits that the FIR is filed after gross delay of 30 years without making any explanation of the delay. He further submits that the complainant has filed the FIR after losing his contention on every front, i.e., on a civil side as well as on revenue proceedings. He would further submit that the criminal proceeding has been misused by filing the FIR, which is nevertheless no more than a civil dispute, if to be considered as gospel truth. Mr. Majmudar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, apart from the afore narrated submissions, submits that that the complainant has filed Regular Civil Suit No. 145 of 2012 before the learned Senior Civil Court, Bharuch for declaration and permanent injunction against the petitioner nos.1 and 2 for a land situated at Village: Samlod, Taluka: Bharuch. The learned advocate Mr. Majmudar further submits that in Paragraph No.4 of the plaint, complainant specifically averred that his grandfather has relinquished share from the land situated at Village: Chorbhuj, (the land disputed in the FIR) by executing the family settlement on 22^nd May, 1980. The learned advocate Mr. Majmudar, therefore, submits that the pleading in the suit since binding to the complainant, he cannot take a different or divergent view by filing the FI