The main legal point established is the need for careful scrutiny of evidence before taking cognizance of offences, and the importance of distinguishing civil disputes from criminal liability.

ORDER

M.Y. Eqbal, J.

1. By this application the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 27 8.2004 Passed by the Chief judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Bariatu P.S. Case No. 32/2002, where by he has taken cognizance for the offence under Sections 467, 468, 471, 419 and 120B IPC, although in the final report the police found that it was a civil dispute related to land and the civil matter is pending in court.

2. The opposite party No. 2, Professor Satish Kumar claiming himself to be the son-in-law and power of attorney holder of Bhagwan Prasad Singh lodged a complaint against the petitioners, alleging, inter alia, that his father-in-law purchased a piece of land through a reregistered deed of sale in the year 1963 from Smt. Indu Rai. After purchase Bhagwan Prasad Singh alleged to have erected boundary wall around the land, constructed one small room and planted some trees. Further allegation is that on 26.10.2001 when the complainant went to see the land he found that wall was broken from the side of the house of petitioner No. 1. The accused petitioner No. 1, Dr. B.N.S. Bhonsle told him that Bhagwan Prasad Singh sold the land to him by registered deed of sale dated 15.1.90 and he showed the deed of sale to the complainant. It was further alleged in the complaint petition that on 28.10.2001 Bhagwan Prasad Singh came to the complainant at Ranchi and the complainant along with him and others went to the petitioner No. 1 at his residence. The petitioner No. 1 showed the registered deed to Bhagwan Prasad Singh. After seeing his signature forged on the deed Bhagwan Prasad Singh asked the petitioner NO. 1 as to why he did so. The petitioner No. 1 Dr. Bhonsle alleged to have told in presence of witnesses that all these things have happened at the instance of petitioner No. 3. The complainant, therefore, alleged that the accused persons under the conspiracy managed, executed and signed the two sale deeds, which were registered. The complainant further stated that he got signature of Bhagwan Prasad Singh on the two sale deeds examined by the experts, who reported that the signature was forged.

3. It appears t hat by order dated 5.2.2002 the Magistrate sent the complaint to the police u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. for institution of a case and submission of final form after investigation. On receipt of the complaint the: police registered a case being Bariatu P.S. Case No. 32/2002. The investigating officer after investigation of the case submitted final export on 30.9.2002 stating that out and out it is a civil dispute. The Magistrate did not agree with the final report of the police and held that it is not a case of civil dispute only and there is a prima facie case and took cognizance of the offence by passing the impugned order dated 27.8.2004.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners assailed the impugned order of cognizance passed by the Magistrate as being erroneous, illegal and without jurisdiction. Learned Counsel submitted that the magistrate while disagreeing with the final report of the police ought to have made further enquiry before taking cognizance of the offence. Learned Counsel submitted that after the land was sold to the petitioner No. 1 he got his name mutated in the Municipal Corporation as well as in the office of the Circle Officer, Town Office, Ranchi. Learned Counsel further submitted that in the year 1994 the complainant and his associates tried to interfere with the possession of the petitioner No. 1 over the land, which resulted into a proceeding u/s 144 Cr.P.C. against Bhagwan Prasad Singh and the complainant and others. The said proceeding was converted into a proceeding u/s 145 Cr.P.C. in which the complainant and other persons appeared and filed written statement and participated in the proceeding. The Magistrate finally passed order on 9.9.96 declaring possession of the first party over the land and communicated the order to the Bariati Police station. Various other facts have been pointed out by the l