Insufficient evidence to establish conspiracy and forgery.

JUDGMENT

J.P.Gupta, J. - This order shall govern the disposal of aforesaid both cases as these cases are arising out of the common criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners in the court below.

2. This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred for quashment of proceedings of S.T. No.449/2011 pending in the court of 9th Additional Session Judge, Jabalpur arising out of Crime No. 412/2009 registered at Police Station Omti, Jabalpur, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120-B of the IPC against the petitioners.

3. The facts, in brief, giving rise to these petitions are that the property bearing plot no. 567, diversion sheet no. 155-B, area 30390 Sq. ft., is situated at Mouza Subhash Nagar, Wright Town, in Subhadra Kumari Chouhan Ward, Jabalpur, upon which, old house nos. 2155, 2156 and 2157 are constructed, about which, petitioner Prakashchand Agrawal had entered into an agreement with Saiyad Wahidul Haq S/o. Saiyed Abdul Gafoor, for purchasing and in this regard, on 19.7.2002 an agreement was executed between both the parties. Before execution of sale deed, on 21.2.2003 Saiyad Wahidul Haque had died. Saiyad Wahidul Haq disclosed to petitioner Prakashchand Agrawal that the aforesaid property was the ownership of his father Late Saiyed Abdul Gafoor and on the basis of Will dated 10.04.1944 he shown himself to be the sole owner of the property in question. After the death of Saiyad Wahidul Haq, his two daughters namely Kaneez Aisha and Kaneez Fatima, who were not initially agreed to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner Prakashchand Agrawal but later on, on the condition of payment of further additional amount as consideration, both were agreed to execute the sale deed and in this regard, an agreement was made by Kaneez Aisha, by getting Rs.10 lacs in advance through bank transaction. However, later on, the sale deed was not executed by Kaneez Aisha and Kaneez Fatima.

4. On the other hand, on the basis of getting their name mutated in the revenue papers in place of Makbool Begum W/o. Saiyad Abdul Gafoor, other accused persons sold the land by preparing separate sale deed for a separate portion of the land to various persons as on 3.11.2005 co-accused Smt. Jameela Begum and Smt. Shaheen sold out the land to Jogindar Kaur W/o. M. S. Gujral and Smt. Kanak Lakhoutiya and on 22.11.2005 co-accused Smt. Iqbal Jehan sold out the land to the aforesaid Jogindar Kaur and Smt. Kanak Lakhoutiya and on 22.11.2005 co-accused Smt. Shahida Begum, Nurul Haq, Shamsul Haq and Maha- jbeen Begum sold out the land to Smt. Sarita Vaishno and on 24.11.2005 Mohd. Samshool Haq @ Mustaq, Shagufa @ Arshi, Tarnnum @ Parveen and Tabbasum Parveen sold out the land to Smt. Anum Bahar Ansari.

5. Prakashchand Agrawal petitioner filed a civil suit before the District court, Jabalpur for specific performance of contract earlier against Kaneez Fatima and Kaneez Aisha but later on, by way of amendment also challenged the aforesaid transactions made by other co-accused persons.

6. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid transactions, one Ashok Kumar S/o. Hanshraj through power of attorney holder Ravindra Kumar, on 4.5.2009 made a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Jabalpur that the aforesaid property is the ownership of Ashok Kumar, and Saiyad Wahidul Haq was only the care taker of the said property and on the basis of forged documents, petitioner Prakashchand Agrawal entered into an agreement for purchasing of the said land from the daughters of late Saiyad Wahidul Haq and on the basis of the aforesaid documents, petitioner Prakashchand with the connivance of Kaneez Aisha and Kaneez Fatima filed a civil suit for specific performance of contract. Though, Saiyad Wahidul Haq and his daughters had no title to sell the property, about which, Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur executed a registered lease deed in favour of Ashok Kumar Malaram S/o. Hanshraj. Apart from it, one M. S. Gujral H/o. Jogindar Kau