Point of Law: there is growing tendency of the complainants attempting to give the cloak of a criminal offence to matters which are essentially and purely civil in nature, obviously either to apply pressure on the accused or out of enmity towards the accused, or to subject the accused to harassment. Criminal courts should ensure that the proceedings before it are not used for settling scores or to pressurize parties to settle the civil dispute.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Pramod Kumar Maurya, Advocate holding brief of Shri Shitlesh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Pankaj Saxena, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The applicant has challenged the order dated 09.01.2020, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau in Criminal Case No. 5864 of 2018 (Bajrangi Lal Gupta verus State of U.P. and another) by which his complaint was rejected. He has also challenged the order dated 04.08.2020 passed by learned Session Judge, Mau in Criminal Revision No. 13 of 2020 (Computerized No. CNR No. UPMA01-000657-2020 by which his revision was also dismissed.

3. The applicant stating himself to be sister's son of Maina Devi (Mausi) filed the complaint case that opposite party no. 2 (Bhanja) of Maina Devi fraudulently got executed a registered sale deed dated 06.04.2017 with respect to Gata No. 513 M area 14 kadi situated in Village Korauli, Tehsil Ghosi District, Mau from Maina Devi without making payment of any sale consideration, whereas the applicant had been looking after his Mausi.

4. The applicant's application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was rejected by Magistrate, against which, he filed Criminal Revision No. 198 of 2018 and after decision, therein the complaint was filed for taking action for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 504 and 506 I.P.C.

5. The statement of the applicant was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the statement of P.W.-1 Shankar Prasad and P.W.-2 Lalji were recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C.

6. The learned Magistrate by order dated 04.01.2020 rejected the complaint and the applicant's revision was also rejected on 04.08.2020 as aforesaid.

7. The Magistrate rejected the compliant on the grounds that the dispute was predominantly of civil nature. The remedy by way of civil suit was available. The applicant had not stated if his Mausi was alive or not and that no prima facie case for summoning was made out.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that prima facie, coginzable offence for summoning was made out against the opposite party no. 2 and the Magistrate rejected the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. in cursory manner. The revisional court also did not consider this aspect of the matter and illegally dismissed the revision.

9. Learned A.G.A. submits that the orders under challenge do not suffer from any illegality as the dispute was of civil nature.

10. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

11. A perusal of the complaint shows that the dispute is predominantly a civil dispute regarding execution of sale deed by the applicant's Mausi in favour of opposite party no. 2.

12. As per the own case of the applicant Maina Devi was recorded tenure holder. If the sale consideration passed to the transferor or not, can be considered in the suit said to be pending, in the statement of the applicant/complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., before the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division).

13. In Mohd Ibrahim versus State of Bihar (2009) 8 SCC 751, it has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that there is growing tendency of the complainants attempting to give the cloak of a criminal offence to matters which are essentially and purely civil in nature, obviously either to apply pressure on the accused or out of enmity towards the accused, or to subject the accused to harassment. Criminal courts should ensure that the proceedings before it are not used for settling scores or to pressurize parties to settle the civil dispute.

14. In Medmeme, LLC and others versus Ihorse BPO Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 13 SCC 374 where the dispute between the parties was of civil nature and proceedings in respect of the same were pending before the arbitrator the proceedings of the criminal complaint were quashed. Paragraph nos. 12 to 15 of Medmeme, LLC (supra) are being reproduced as under:-

"12. After going through the allegations co