Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

19 . 12 .2024

1. Heard Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Malay Jain, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No.1/State and Mr. Banhiman Roy, learned counsel, appearing for respondents No. 3 & 4.

2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:

“It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the instant 482 petition filed by the petitioner and the order dated 15.06.2022 (Annexure P/1), passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate Janjgir-Champa, whereby the Magistrate has refused to accept the closure report, may kindly be set aside, so far as it relates to the petitioner is concerned and the learned Magistrate may kindly be directed to accept the closure report submitted by the Police, so far as it relates to the petitioner is concerned, in the interest of justice.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the purchaser of the land bearing Khasra No. 627 area 0.20 acres, situated at Village Naya Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa. Petitioner has purchased the land vide registered sale deed dated 30.05.2015 from respondents No. 2 to 4, namely, Laxmi, Anil and Sanjay. After execution of the sale deed, the petitioner was put in possession of the property. The petitioner has paid the entire amount of consideration and there is no dispute between the petitioner and respondents No. 2 to 4. The sale deed was registered, the adequate stamp duty was also paid by the petitioner and the sale deed was executed after following the due process. He submits that on 26.12.2020, one D.R. Kurrey, Revenue Inspector lodged the FIR in respect of the incident occurred on 30.05.2015 and the said FIR was lodged against the petitioner and the respondents No. 2 to 4. The FIR was lodged inter alia on the allegations that the complainant is a Revenue Inspector posted at Malkharoda. It was alleged that, the petitioner and other co-accused persons by playing fraud and by manipulation and by making forge signature and seal have prepared the forged Nazri Naksha and got executed the sale deed. It was also alleged that at no point of time he was posted as Patwari Baradwar.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that from bare perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it is abundantly clear that the allegations are pertains to the Nazri Naksha attached with the sale deed. The Police has investigated the matter recorded the statements of the relevant witnesses and statement of the Patwari and submitted the closure report before the Judicial Magistrate on 03.09.2021. The closure report was submitted after getting approved from the Superintendent of Police. The closure report was submitted to the effect that no offence is made out. The contents of the closure report shows that, the complainant himself has disclosed that, under the pressure of some Dhruv Agrawal, the report was made and after verifying the revenue records, he came to know that he has signed the said map and it was prepared on the instance of Naib Tehsildar. It was also observed that the report was made under the pressure of one Dhruv Agrawal and the afÏdavit to that effect was also submitted. He also submits that the closure report was filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Janjgir-Champa on 03.09.2021 and the learned Magistrate has issued notices to the complainant and one Suresh Dhruv. The Statement of the complainant was recorded on 03.09.2021 and on the same date the statement of Suresh Dhruv was also recorded.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the Magistrate vide its order dated 15.06.2022 has refused to accept the Khatma and has closed the proceedings. The learned Magistrate has failed to appreciate the statement of the complainant and Suresh Dhruv. It is submitted that, there was no occasion to submit he forged Nazri Naksha because the boundaries of the pro