Criminal proceedings should be quashed when a dispute is essentially civil in nature and the FIR is used as a tool for harassment or extortion, lacking the essential ingredients of a criminal offence, thereby constituting an abuse of the process of the court.

JUDGMENT

1. The present application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of the FIR registered with Dumas Police Station, District Surat, being I-C.R. No.11 of 2014 dated 25.03.2014, for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 166, 167, 171, 181, 182, 191, 192, 193, 196, 199 and 200 of the Indian Penal Code, against 18 accused persons including the present applicants, who have been arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 6.

2. As per the recitals of the FIR, the complainant, who is the respondent No.3 herein and the real sister of the applicants, has alleged that the agricultural land bearing Survey No.51/2 (old Survey No.71/1/B) admeasuring about 4400 square meters situated at Village Magdalla, as well as land bearing Survey No.34/1/2 (old Survey No.44/1) admeasuring about 4200 square meters situated at Village Magdalla, were originally owned and possessed by Gulabbhai Durlabbhai prior to the year 1949. It is further alleged that the aforesaid lands were purchased by the grandfather of the applicants as well as the complainant, namely Somabhai Keshabhai, by executing a registered conveyance deed in the year 1949, whereas the land bearing Survey No.34/1/2 was purchased by way of an oral agreement by the said grandfather. Pursuant thereto, Mutation Entry No.204 dated 22.06.1949 came to be entered in the revenue record. The grandfather expired on 25.06.1981, and thereafter entries regarding the heirs were made in the revenue record, whereby along with the name of the father of the applicants and the complainant, the names of six other heirs were also entered. Subsequently, except the name of the father, the other names were deleted from the revenue record on the basis of a relinquishment deed, and the name of the father was entered as the sole owner of the property vide Mutation Entry No.595 dated 15.10.1981. Thereafter, the father of the applicants and the complainant expired on 03.05.2001, and therefore the names of the heirs, including that of the present complainant, were mutated in the revenue record vide Mutation Entry No.1204 dated 16.07.2001.

2.1. It is the case of the complainant that after her marriage she was residing with her husband and in-laws at a different place and has one son and one daughter from the wedlock. It is further alleged that applicant No.6, who is her brother and a lawyer by profession, visited the complainant and requested her to sign a power of attorney stating that it was required for the purpose of managing the property of their father, and that her presence may not be required from time to time. Accordingly, a power of attorney came to be executed on 26.06.2004. However, the said power of attorney was subsequently cancelled on 02.06.2005, and a notice regarding such cancellation was issued to applicant No.5 – Rameshbhai, in whose favour the power of attorney had been executed, along with a publication in a newspaper on 11.03.2006.

2.2. It is further alleged that the complainant had also raised objections before the Talati-cum-Mantri of Village Magdalla, the Registrar of the Surat Sub-Registrar’s Office, the Talati-cum-Mantri of Village Aabhva, the Talati-cum-Mantri of Village Narthan and the Sub-Registrar of Village Olpad. The complainant had also issued a public notice in the newspaper on 03.06.2005 informing about the cancellation of the power of attorney executed in favour of applicant No.5. It is alleged that in connivance with the other accused persons named in the FIR, the applicants sold t