N.C. SHARMA, J.—This Order will decide three Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions nos. 190 of 1987, 5 of 1987 and 145 of 1986 filed before this Court under section 482 Cr. P. C. by a common order as the same question of law comes for consideration in all these three petitions.

2. Facts leading to the filing of Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 190 of 1987 are that on June 6, 1981 Roop Singh son of Mukhtiar Singh had filed a criminal complaint in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Hanumangarh against Kulwant Singh, Ram Narain and Harmit Singh complaining of the commission of offences under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 166, 167 and 120B I.P.C. It was alleged by Roop Singh in his complaint that he was Khatedar tenant of agricultural land in chak No. 27 PTP, Sq No. 24 and comprised in killa Nos. 1 to 19 and in Sq. No. 24, Killas Nos. 14 and 15, measuring in all 20 Bighas 10 Biswas (nahari), and he was in its peaceful possession. It was mentioned that Kulwantsingh and his deceased brother Raghuveersingh held agricultural land in their Khatedari in chak No. 28 AMP measuring 3 Bigha and in chak No. 25 PTP measuring 16 Bighas, in all 19 Bighas, over which Kulwantsingh and his deceased brother Raghuveersingh were in possession. It was alleged that Kulwantsingh and his deceased brother used to insist upon the complainant to exchange his agricultural land with their land to which the former did not agree. Due to this refusal, Kulwantsingh and his deceased brother Raghuveersingh in collusion with Ramnarain and Harmitsingh prepared a forged exchange deed and got affixed forged thumb impression of the complainant on that deed and presented the same before Deputy Superintendent, Sadul Sahar for the purpose of getting a mutation effected in their favour. Roopsingh complainant denied that he had executed any exchange-deed and asserted that Kulwantsingh, Ramnarain and Harmitsingh committed various offences under the above mentioned sections of the Indian Penal Code. This criminal complaint was forwarded by the Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Hanumangarh, to the Station House Officer, Police Station, Sadulsahar under section 156(3) Cr. P. C. for investigation. It is asserted that the police after investigation filed a charge-sheet against the petitioner Ramnarain and Kulwantsingh in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Hanumangarh on October 30, 1982 under sections 420, 467,468, 471 and 109 I. P. C. The Magistrate took cognizance for the said offences, issued process against the petitioner and Kulwantsingh and proceeded further to frame charges. Later on, this criminal case was transferred to the court of Judicial Magistrate, Sadulsahar. It is mentioned that on June 8, 1981, Roopsingh filed a Revenue Suit No. 81 of 1981 in the Court of the Assistant Collector, Hanumangarh challenging the above exchange deed. In that suit, Roopsingh filed a certified copy of the exchange-deed. A certified copy of the revenue suit No. 89 of 81 has been filed by the petitioner. In that suit Roopsingh claimed for a declaration of his rights in respect of 19 Bighas 10 Biswas agricultural land detailed above and also claimed for a declaration that the alleged exchange-deed purporting to bear the date August 20, 1974 was void and ineffective as against him.

3. The second S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 5 of 1987 has been filed by Hetram, Ramchander, Sukhdas and Laduram as against, the State of Rajasthan, Gangaram and Hiraram. It has been alleged by them that on May 2, 1986 Gangaram and Hiraram non-petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 filed a criminal complaint against the petitioners in the court of Additional Judicial Magistrate, Nohar stating that the petitioner No. 4 Laduram got prepared a forged will purporting to have been executed on July 7, 1985 by Tulchharam in favour of one Omprakash son of Laduram petitioner No.4 even after the death of Tulchharam. Petitioner No. 3 Sukhdas was the scribe of that forged will and the petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 Hetram and Ramchandra

Click Here to Read the rest of this document