Civil disputes should not be converted into criminal cases; FIR quashed as allegations did not constitute an offense and indicated mala fides.

Order :

ANAND SHARMA, J.

1. By way of Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, the petitioner has challenged FIR No.0243/2017 dated 17.07.2017 registered at Police Station Shastri Nagar, Jaipur City (North) for alleged offence under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 471 and 192 IPC .

2. It is stated that the petitioner and complainant are real brothers and there is dispute with regard to right, interest and title in respect of plot No.A-98, Indira Verma Kachi Basti, Shastri Nagar. One scheme was launched by the State Government for issuing lease deeds to the residents of Kachi Basti on the basis of possession and accordingly grandfather of the petitioner submitted an application for allotment, however, he expired on 24.01.1996. Petitioner was residing with his grandfather and after his death, he was in sole possession of the aforesaid plot. However, ignoring claim of the petitioner, the plot was allotted to another person Ishwar Lal S/o Bhairu Lal, therefore, one suit of permanent injunction was filed by the petitioner, which was decided in favour of the petitioner vide judgment and decree dated 01.03.2008, which reveals that the dispute was with regard to aforesaid plot No.A-98 and it was categorically stated by the petitioner in the plaint that possession letter in favour of the grandfather was issued on 21.01.1988 and he was in possession of the said plot after death of his grandfather in the capacity of owner of the plot. After examining the record and evidence, decree dated 01.03.2008 was passed to the effect that the said plot may not be allotted to any other person and no interference whatsoever be made in the peaceful use and enjoyment of the petitioner over the said plot. Further, on the basis of such decree, lease deed/patta dated 18.03.2013 was issued in favour of the petitioner by Jaipur Nagar Nigam, Jaipur, which has also been registered in the office of Sub-Registrar, Department of Registration and Stamps.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per scheme launched by the State Government, on the basis of possession, an individual was entitled only for allotment of one plot and still, the complainant, as well as his wife and son have also been allotted different plots No.B-89, A-28 and B-81 in the same scheme and in proof thereof, copies of allotment letters have been placed on record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier complaint with regard to getting allotment by submitting wrong affidavit was made by the Nagar Nigam, which was duly investigated by the Police Authorities and a report was submitted in the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.11, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur on 23.06.2017, wherein no offence whatsoever was found to be made out against the petitioner and observation has been given that the petitioner has not filed any false affidavit whatsoever.

5. On the basis of aforesaid facts, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that again one another impugned FIR was lodged by brother of the petitioner in quite malicious manner and only to settle personal scores by invoking provisions of criminal law with the allegation that the petitioner has got allotment of the aforesaid plot No.A-98 by submitting wrong affidavit. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of the above facts and more particularly when patta/lease deed was issued in favour of the petitioner in compliance of judgment and decree passed by Civil Court, which has not been challenged by any person including the complainant, it is clear that the dispute, if any, between the family is absolutely civil in nature, for which the petitioner cannot