Criminal proceedings cannot be initiated for civil disputes; allegations must establish a prima facie case for trial.

JUDGMENT :

Subhash Vidyarthi, J.

1. Heard Sri Ravi Shanker, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gyanendra Singh, learned A.G.A. and Sri Dwijendra Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.3.

2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the applicant has sought quashing of the charge sheet dated 06.07.2023, under Sections 406, 420 IPC submitted in furtherance of FIR No. 496 of 2022, Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow East, under Sections 419, 420, 467,468, 471, 406 IPC and the order dated 17.11.2023 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Court No. 26, Lucknow taking cognizance of the offences and summoning the applicant to face trial of the offences, along with the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case.

3. The F.I.R was lodged by the opposite party no.3 on 25.07.2022 against six persons, including the applicant alleging that he had purchased a property through a sale deed dated 18.02.2020 from co-accused Vijay Shankar Rai and all the five co-accused persons, including the applicant, had acted as brokers. On 05.04.2022 a news item was published in a news paper that the land belonged to the Government, from which he came to know that he had been duped by the accused persons.

4. In the statement of the informant recorded by the investigation officer, he reiterated the F.I.R version. Although, the F.I.R alleged commission of offences under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C after investigation a charge sheet has been submitted for commission of offences under Section 406 and 420 I.P.C only against all the accused persons and the trial court has taken cognizance of the offence and summoned the accused persons by means of an order dated 17.11.2023.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that even as per the allegation of the opposite party no.3, the applicant had merely acted as a broker in settlement of the deal between the opposite party no.3 and co-accused Vijay Shankar Rai. The applicant has not executed the sale deed or verified the title of the seller.

6. The learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that there is no allegation of any conspiracy having being entered into between the accused person.

7. Sri Dwijendra Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.3 has filed a counter affidavit on behalf of the opposite party no.3, which is taken on record. It has inter alia been stated in the counter affidavit that the opposite party no.3 wanted to buy a land in Gomti Nagar for construction of his office and one Bhupendra Singh, who was known to the opposite party no.3, met him along with Mohd Zaki, Jagendra Kumar (the applicant), Shiv Bhawan Singh, and Ram Asrey Singh in January, 2020 and they showed the land of Vijay Shankar Rai. All the aforesaid persons showed the chain of three title deeds in respect of a particular plot of land, the first one being a sale deed dated 03.01.1985 executed by Indira Awas Society in favour of Sri Ram Asrey Singh. Sri Ram Asrey Singh had sold the property to one Suresh Giri by means of a sale deed dated 01.08.2018 and Suresh Giri had sold the land to Vijay Shanker Rai through a sale deed dated 22.10.2018. The applicant and co-accused Shiv Bhawan Singh had witnessed execution of sale deed dated 01.08.2018 executed by Ram Asrey Singh.

8. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the opposite party no.3 had made inquiries from the concerned Lekhpal and also from the office of the Sub-Registrar and after being satisfied about the title of the seller, he had agreed to purchase the land for Rs.1.5 crore in total, including the price of land, expenses for mutation, charges for obtaining NOC from Lucknow Development Authority, map sanction charges and the development charges. The opposite party no.3 paid the amount of Rs.22,00,000/-only through cheque to the seller Vijay Shanker Rai, he claims to have paid Rs.63,00,000/-in cash to Mohd Zaki and Rs.5,00,000/-are said to have been transferred in the account of eac