Criminal proceedings stemming from civil disputes must adhere to procedural law, and findings of civil courts regarding contract enforceability prevail in subsequent criminal cases.

JUDGMENT :

ANAND SHARMA, J.

1. This batch of Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code comes up before this court for consideration of identical and closely connected facts and contentious questions of law. Each petition in this batch involves allegations arising from similar transaction and raises common points, hence, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petitions were accordingly taken up and heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

2. Details of above petitions are being given in short in tabular form as under:

3. For the sake of convenience and to avoid repetition, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, facts stated in S.B. Criminal Misc Petition no. 874/2015 are being taken into consideration for the purpose of adjudication of the common dispute involved in the batch of petitions.

4. Criminal Misc. Petition no. 874/2015 has been filed by the accused-petitioner, Bachan Singh, challenging the order dated 20.03.2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ramgarh, District Alwar, whereby cognizance of offences under Sections 420 and 120-B of IPC has been taken, and the order dated 12.12.2014 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.3, District Alwar, dismissing the revision petition filed against the said cognizance, is also under challenge.

5. The petitioner is one of four brothers namely Manohar Singh, Bhupendra Singh, Nirmal Singh, and Bachan Singh, who are having ancestral land in Village Khalsa Nagar, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar. Nirmal Singh passed away leaving behind legal heirs, namely, Manmohan Singh (son), Harjit Kaur (widow), and daughters Jaspreet Kaur and Taranpreet Kaur. The petitioner and his family purchased the shares of Manmohan Singh and Harjit Kaur through a registered sale deed dated 25.05.2012, while the shares of the daughters remained with them.

6. The complainant, Trilochan Singh, claimed a ¼ share of the same unpartitioned land on the basis of an alleged agreement dated 22.10.2011 executed by Manmohan Singh and Harjit Kaur. Notably, the daughters of Nirmal Singh namely, Jaspreet Kaur and Taranpreet Kaur did not sign the agreement. The complainant filed a civil suit on 31.05.2012 before the District Judge, Alwar, seeking cancellation of the registered sale deed dated 25.05.2012 and specific performance of the alleged agreement dated 22.10.2011. Despite the pendency of the civil suit, the complainant lodged a criminal complaint alleging offences under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 471, and 120-B IPC , which led to FIR No. 370/2012. It was alleged in the FIR that the complainant and accused persons belong to the same family. Land bearing Khasra No. 899, area 35.901 bighas in the village Khalsa Nagar (previously Bilaur). Accused Manmohan Singh and Bachan Singh, with consent of their daughters Jaspreet Kaur and Taranpreet Kaur, agreed to sell this land to the complainant by an agreement dated 22.10.2011 at a rate of Rs. 3 lakh per bigha. An advance of Rs. 1 lakh was received in cash, and it was agreed that the daughters would execute the required documentation. Previously, there were disputes between Accused Manmohan Singh and Manohar Singh and their relations were not cordial. Accused Manmohan Singh and Bachan Singh resided in