The court emphasized the requirement of a complaint before the court for charges under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code and deemed the charge under section 420 premature pending the outcome of the civil suit.

JUDGMENT :

1. Shri A. S. Kutumbale, learned senior counsel with Shri M. I. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Shri R. S. Chouhan, learned Government Advocate for respondent/State. Shri Rakesh Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No. 2.

2. With consent of both the parties matter is heard finally.

3. This application under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code has been filed for quashment of First Information Report No.251/2013 under sections 193 and 420 of Indian Penal Code and consequential proceedings arising therefrom pending before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class in criminal case No. 33258/2013.

4. Background fact giving rise to this application are that Jamunabai wife of Gajrajsingh through attorney Sumanbai filed a criminal complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore alleging that the present petitioners committed fraud on her by preparing forged documents in respect of sale of land bearing survey No. 43/1 area 0.758 hectare, survey No. 44 area 0.024 hectare, survey No. 49/2 area 0.809 hectare and survey No. 119/1 area 0.060 hectare of village Digwal, Tehsil and district Indore Patwari Halka No. 85 of which complainant Jamunabai was the owner. It is also alleged in the complaint that when the complainant Jamunabai filed an application before the Revenue Court for issuance of fresh Rin Pustika, the petitioner No. 1 Sardarbai filed such forged documents and false affidavits before the Court to show that she purchased the land in question along with petitioner No. 2, who is her husband from Jamunabai, who is her mother.

5. The learned Magistrate initially dismissed the application filed under section 156(3), Criminal Procedure Code. However, the complainant went in revision before the Sessions Court and the Sessions Court remanded the matter back to the Magistrate with a direction to reconsider the application and thereafter while reconsidering the application under section 156(3), Criminal Procedure Code, the Magistrate allowed the application and directed the concerned police station to register an offence under sections 193, 420 of Indian Penal Code.

6. In compliance to this order, the police station Raoji Bazar, district Indore registered crime No. 251/2013 and the investigation commenced. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class on 8-10-2013, which was registered as criminal case No. 33258/2013. For quashment of the aforesaid FIR and resultant proceedings before the Judicial Magistrate this application is filed under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that under section 193 of Indian Penal Code, the Magistrate cannot take cognizance under section 195(1)(b), Criminal Procedure Code, unless a complaint is filed by the Court before whom such offence is alleged to have committed in proceedings. However, no such complaint is filed by the Tehsildar and therefore the Magistrate cannot proceed under section 193, Indian Penal Code. So far as section 420, Indian Penal Code is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners argues that a civil suit is pending and therefore when the matter is pending before the Civil Court and the disputed documents are subject matter of such Civil litigation, then criminal proceedings should not continue.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandrapal Singh vs. Maharaj Singh, AIR 1982 SC 1238 and Paramjeet Batra vs. State of Uttarakhand, (2013) 11 SCC 673.

9. So far as charge under section 193 of Indian Penal Code is concerned, it is apparent that affidavits which were allegedly false were filed before the Tehsildar in proceedings for issuance of duplicate Rin Pustika. The Tehsildar did not file any complaint before any Court that such affidavits were false and therefore a charge under section 193, Indian Penal Code cannot proceed due to bar created under section 195(1)(b) of Criminal Proce