IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE

th

ON THE 8 OF OCTOBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 37168 of 2021 AZAD KHAN AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Faisal Ali Shah - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Rajiv Budholiya, learned counsel for the respondent [R-2].

Shri Rohit Shrivastav P L appearing on behalf of Advocate General.

ORDER This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashment of the FIR bearing Crime No.193/2020, registered at Police Station Badoni, District Datia, on 15.8.2020, for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. As per the prosecution case, on 14.06.2020, the complainant submitted an application at Police Station Badoni, alleging that land measuring 30x30 sq. ft., situated at Moja, Badoni within Nagar Panchayat Badoni, was allotted in the name of Vishvajeet Singh by the Nagar Panchayat Badoni vide its resolution dated 27.01.2009, along with a No Objection Certificate provided by the Panchayat on the same date. However, the accused persons, by applying underhanded means, got a sale deed registered on 13.11.2019, wherein the present applicant projected himself as the seller and the co-accused as the buyers. They had no right to sell the land belonging to the complainant and his family. After inquiry, an FIR was registered at Crime No. 193/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections

420, 467, 468, and 471 of the IPC.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that from the contents of the FIR, no offence of cheating or forgery is prima facie made out against the petitioners. The land in question does not, in any way, belong to the complainant. The Village Panchayat Badoni, Datia, by its resolution and order dated 01.12.2004, allotted the said land to one Anish Khan. After the said order, Anish Khan also paid the premium for the land, as evidenced by receipt no. 71 dated 01.12.2004. After fulfillment of all the necessary requirements and formalities, the office of Village Panchayat Badoni Khurd issued an ownership certificate in favour of Anish Khan on 10.12.2004. It is submitted by learned counsel that, after the allotment of the land in favour of Anish Khan, he acquired possession of the same and, thereafter, by a registered sale deed dated 25.02.2005, Anish Khan sold the land to petitioner no. 1. In the sale deed, it is clearly mentioned that the said land was allotted to Anish Khan by the Panchayat. It is further alleges that the ownership certificate dated 10.12.2004, issued by Village Panchayat Badoni Khurd in favour of Anish Khan, is part of the sale deed and is still available in the office of the Registrar of Property, Datia. Learned counsel further submitted that as petitioner no. 1 derived perfect title over the land in question through the sale deed dated 25.02.2005, he had full right and title over the said land and, by exercising those rights, sold the land to petitioner no. 2 by a sale deed dated 18.11.2019. The rights and title of petitioner no. 1 over the land in question are unquestionable; therefore, the allegations levelled in the application by respondent no. 2 are uncalled for. It is thus submitted that the dispute between the parties is essentially civil in nature, but has been maliciously given a criminal colour to exert undue pressure upon the petitioners.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents opposed the petition and prays for its rejection. It s argued that from the surrounding circumstances, the presence of mens rea is clearly established, which is a necessary ingredient for constituting the offence under Section 420 IPC. It is further submitted that charges have already been framed against the petitioners, and the same have not been challenged.

5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Before proceeding further, it would