IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA rd ON THE 3 OF NOVEMBER, 2023 WRIT PETITION No. 26811 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

GENDI BAI W/O LATE KARAN SINGH BAROD, AGED ABOUT 65

1. YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE R/O GRAM RAJGARH TEHSIL SARDARPUR DISTT. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

PANKAJ S/O LATE KARAN SINGH BAROD, AGED ABOUT 35

2. YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE R/O GRAM RAJGARH TEHSIL SARDARPUR DISTT. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (SHRI DURGESH SHARMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS.)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

1. DEPARTMENT OF HOME VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (M.P.)

(MADHYA PRADESH)

2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

TOWN INSPECTOR THROUGH POLICE STATION SARDARPUR

3.

DIST. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (POLICE) SARDARPUR DIST. DHAR

4.

(MADHYA PRADESH)

VIJAY KUMAR S/O MOHANLAL SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 5. OCCUPATION: PROPERTY BROKER RAJGARH TEHSIL SARDARPUR DIST. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

PARAS S/O MANGILAL JAIN, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 6. OCCUPATION: PROPERTY BROKER RAJGARH TEHSIL SARDARPUR DIST. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (SHRI KUSHAL GOYAL, LEARNED DY. ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR THE RESPONDENTS/STATE ON ADVANCE COPY.)

This petition coming on for hearing on admission this day, the court passed the following: :

ORDER

1. The petitioners have filed the present petition seeking direction to the respondents to register FIR against respondents No. 5 & 6 on the basis of their complaints (Annexure P/1, P/2 & P/3)).

2. Petitioner No.1 is wife and petitioner No.2 is son of Late Karan Singh Barod who was owner of land bearing Survey No. 455/1/1 area 0.156 Hect situated at Tehsil Rajgarh, Sardarpur. He executed a Power of Attorney in favour of respondents No. 5 & 6 on 30.7.1993, but cancelled the same on 12.5.2011. According to the petitioners after cancellation of the Power of Attorney respondents No.5 and 6 had no authority to sell the said land and despite that they sold the land measuring 900 Sq.ft. to one Jagdish Chouhan, hence they committed an offence under the IPC. The police authorities are under statutory obligation to register an FIR and conduct investigation against them u/s. 406, 409, 467, 468, 471, 420, 34, 120B of the IPC.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the SDM has issued the show-cause notice to respondents No. 5 & 6 for illegal colonization in which they submitted the reply and admitted the execution and cancellation of the Power of Attorney, therefore, there is an admission on their part for selling the land after cancellation of the Power of Attorney.

4. Copy of the sale-deed dated 3.10.2012 has been filed as Annexure P/6 with this petition, in which plot Nos. 34 and 35 are there, but Survey number is not there. It is also a matter of evidence as to whether respondents No.5 and 6 had any knowledge about cancellation of the Power of Attorney. If the police is not taking any action, the remedy to is to file a representation to the Superintendent of Police which the petitioners have already submitted. If the Superintendent of Police is not taking any action, then the petitioners may approach the Magistrate by way of complaint u/s. 200 of the Cr.P.C. They are required to given an affidavit or evidence in support of the allegations before the Magistrate. The petitioners are making a complaint only in respect of sale of 900 Sq.ft. of land, but as per the material available on record, entire survey number has been sold by cutting the plots to establish an illegal colony. Nothing has been disclosed in respect of sale of other part of the land in question. All these material are liable to be examined by the Magistrate before giving any direction to the police u/s. 156 of the Cr.P.C. for investigation. No case for issuance of any writ is made out.

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

( VIVEK RUSIA )

JUDGE Alok/-

Digitally signed by ALOK GARGAV Date: 2023.11.04 16:48:40 +05'30'