IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment emphasizes the distinction between civil and criminal disputes, the limited jurisdiction of the court at the stage of discharge or quashing of criminal proceedings, and the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT :

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material placed on record.

3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.894 of 2022 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC at Police Station- Kotwali City, District Bijnor with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.

PROSECUTION STORY:

4. The FIR was instituted by the informant Rakesh Sharma that he and his wife have a property in Civil Lines, Bijnor which has residence, shops and open land surrounded by boundary wall which is being used by them for the last 50 years. The said property was inherited by the informant after a family partition in the year 1974 after an order was taken from the Court. The two persons namely, Mohammed Talib and Shankar Lal, are land mafias of the area and have garnered huge black money out of it. They want to illegally grab his property. The informant had sold a certain part of the said property on 14.11.2022. It is learnt that the said land mafias have got executed ten sale deeds of certain parts of the land on 25.11.2022 in the names of their siblings in collusion with Vinita Mehrotra W/o Shri P.K. Mehrotra. The land grabber had got the said sale deeds executed, despite knowing the fact that Smt. Vinita Mehrotra (applicant) does not have any title to the said land.

5. It is further stated in the FIR that the informant had contested several petitions up to the Supreme Court for getting certain shops vacated by filing petitions under the Rent Control Act. The said sale deed have been executed for a consideration of Rs.3,25,00,000,/- although the real value in the open market is much more than the amount shown in the sale deeds.

RIVAL CONTENTIONS:

(Arguments on behalf of applicant)

6. The instant dispute relates to the property under the name of 'Dharm Bhawan' having an approximate area of 2400 square yards situated in the city of Bijnor, U.P.

7. The original owner of the said property was Sahdev Sharma whose wife was Smt. Kusum Rani Sharma and the couple had three siblings, namely, Vinita Mehrotra (applicant), Rakesh Sharma and Sangeeta Narang. The said Sahdev Sharma, father of the applicant, expired on 20.06.2012 and thereafter his wife Kusum Rani Sharma expired on 20.06.2012. It is placed on record that the informant Rakesh Sharma is a practising advocate at the District Court, Bijnor and so was his father Sahdev Sharma and was even a Government Counsel (ADGC) at the District Court, Bijnor.

8. The informant is stated to have filed a collusive suit bearing O.S. No.28 of 1974 before the Civil Judge, Bijnor for partition and permanent injunction under the name of his mother and his father Sahdev Sharma was made a defendant in it during the life time of Dharmveer Sharma (father of Sahdev Sharma, who died on 1.1.1975). In the said original suit, a compromise was filed by the parties on 15.04.1974 and the same was decided on the basis of the said compromise the same day i.e. 15.04.1974 itself and a decree was passed.

9. It is pertinent to mention that the applicant- Vinita Mehrotra, who was already married off in the year 1967, was not a party in the said original suit, as such had no inkling of the said collusive suit and decree obtained by the informant. It is also stated that just 18 days before the death of Smt. Kusum Rani Sharma (mother of the applicant and the informant), a forged Will deed is stated to have been prepared in favour of first informant on 02.06.2012, which has not been signed by her. The deceased is stated to be 86 years old on 2.6.2012.

10. The instant dispute arose when the applicant sent a legal notice to the first informant for partition of the property in question and getting her one third share of the said property on 23.09.2022 and the applicant was forced to file a civil suit as