Back
RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA
Pavnari Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal revision relates to prior judicial orders. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the court assesses the validity of orders from lower courts. (Para 3) |
| 3. fir details and involvement of accused outlined. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. arguments regarding illegality of the order presented. (Para 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. legal proceedings require clarity on offences established and rationale for accusations. (Para 7) |
| 6. cited case law distinguishes civil from criminal nature. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 7. legal principles from previous cases applied. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 8. accusation of forgery not substantiated. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 9. court finds lack of basis for previous orders. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 10. orders are quashed; proceedings dismissed. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J.
By means of present criminal revision, the revisionists, have assailed the order dated 20.6.2012 and 12.7.2012, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Maharajganj, in Criminal Case No.Case no. 797 of 2012, ( State v. Raghvendra Pratap Singh @Ankit and others) under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 471 IPC., P.S. Nichlaul, District- Maharajganj, arising out of Case Crime No.227 of 2012.
2. As both the criminal revisions have arisen
The execution of sale deeds by co-sharers exceeding their portion does not constitute forgery or criminal liability, reaffirming that such disputes are civil in nature.
Execution of sale deeds exceeding a co-sharer’s share does not constitute forgery or cheating, reaffirming that civil disputes should not be criminalized without clear offences being present.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to carefully consider the allegations of cheating and fraud, particularly in cases involving multiple parties and complex transactions. Th....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that abetment and fraudulent execution of a sale deed constitute offenses under the Indian Penal Code, leading to conviction.
Execution of sale deeds does not amount to forgery without clear intent; civil disputes should not be framed as criminal complaints.
The concealment of prior ownership during a property sale constitutes prima facie evidence of cheating, while insufficient evidence exists for forgery charges.
The prohibition for a second FIR does not cover a second FIR, allegations of which are different although relating to the same incident. The concept of sameness in the context of multiple FIRs has be....
It is well settled that in order to constitute an offence of cheating, it must be shown that the accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the representation or promise and ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
