NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRR No. 350 of 2015  Kallu Singh @ Narendra Singh S/o Rain Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Gram- Bhadaura, P.S. and Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Applicant Versus  State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Respondent CRR No. 351 of 2015  Kallu Singh @ Narendra Singh S/o Rain Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Gram- Bhadaura, P.S. and Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Applicant Versus  State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Respondent CRR No. 352 of 2015  Kallu Singh @ Narendra Singh S/o Rain Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Gram Bhadaura, P.S. and Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., ---- Applicant Versus  State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., ---- Respondent CRR No. 353 of 2015  Kallu Singh @ Narendra Singh S/o Rain Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Gram- Bhadaura, P.S. and Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Applicant Versus  State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Respondent CRR No. 356 of 2015  Kallu Singh @ Narendra Singh S/o Rain Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Gram- Bhadaura, P.S. and Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Applicant Versus  State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Respondent AND CRR No. 357 of 2015  Kallu Singh @ Narendra Singh S/o Rain Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Gram- Bhadaura, P.S. and Tahsil Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Applicant Versus  State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, ---- Respondent (Cause Title taken from Case Information System)

For Applicant : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate.

For State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate.

Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

12.06.2024

1. Heard Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate, appearing for State.

2. The present revisions has been iled by the applicant with the following prayers:

“ It is therefore most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may allow these revisions and set aside judgment passed by the learned trial Court in Cr. Case Nos. 452/13, 453/13, 458/13, 456/13, 457/13, 455/13 and the judgment passed by the learned Ist Addl. Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Cr. Appeal No. 215/14, 216/14, 221/14, 219/14, 220/14, 218/14 in the interest of justice.”

3. The applicant has iled this criminal revision against the impugned order dated 12.01.2015 passed in Criminal appeal Nos.215/14, 216/14, 221/14, 219/14, 220/14, 218/14 passed by the 1st A.S.J., Bilaspur C.G. whereby the learned Appellate Court partly allowed the appeals against the judgment and conviction dated 21.10.2014 passed in Criminal Case Nos. 452/13, 453/13, 458/13, 456/13, 457/13, 455/13 by the JMFC, Bilaspur (C.G.). Hence, these revisions.

4. The case of the prosecution in CRR No. 350/2015 are that the complainant Anand Vaishnav (Peon of Tahsil Oice) has iled a memo from the oice of Tahsildar of Masturi in police station Masturi that Government land situated at Gram Bhadaura P.H. No.25 Khasara No. 536/4 & Khasara No. 535/01 total area 5.40 Acres, at Tahsil Masturi has been sold by Anand Ram S/o Dharti pakad to Ms. Ranju Infrecon Pvt. Ltd. Raigarh and on behalf of the buyer Ankul Goyal R/o Bilaspur has signed, purchased. At the time of investigation the police found that there is conspiracy of some people they are namely Sarpanch Shivkumari, Sachiv Shivkumar, witness Vinod Singh, Ajay Yadav, Patwari Firoz Meman, M.L. Sahu (R.I) have made false and fabricated documents i.e. Khasara, B-1, and the agent Raiq Mohammad.

5. The case of the prosecution in CRR No. 351/2015 are that the complainant Lakhanlal has lodge written complaint in police station Masturi that his father Shambhulal is died 10 years before and he is owner of agricultural land s