IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR nd ON THE 2 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 48756 of 2018 ASHOK PIPADA AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appearance:

Senior Advocate Shri Vishal Baheti along with Shri Yash Nagia appeared for petitioner.

Shri Apoorv Joshi GA for the State.

Shri Amit Kumar Panchal – Advocate for respondent no. 2.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORDER

1. This petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C is filed for quashment of FIR registered at Crime no 264 of 2018, Police Station – Industrial Area, Ratlam and the orders dated 11/12/2017 and 06/04/2018 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ratlam with consequential proceedings.

2. The exposition of facts giving rise to present petition is as under :

A. Shashikala Chopda, the complainant filed a written complaint before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ratlam on 11/12/2017 inter-alia stating that she is owner of agricultural lands bearing Survey no. 175/3 area 0.100 area hectors and Survey no. 175/10-1 area 0.100 hectors adjacent to Rajgarh Naya to Barbar Road. She had installed wire fencing covering her lands in the year 2001 and applied for demarcation of lands before the Tehsildar, Ratlam and the Sub-Divisional Officer, Ratlam. Accordingly, demarcation of land was conducted on 15/06/2001 by Naib Tehsildar, Revenue Inspector and Patwari. A map of the land showing adjacent to Barbar-Rajgarh road was prepared. Respondent no. 1 Sarita Pipada and respondent no. 2 Jyoti Pipada had purchased the land bearing Survey no. 175/6, which is away from main road, but Sarita, her husband Ashok Pipada and Jyoti and her husband Ramesh Pipada in conspiracy with accused no. 5 Rameshchandra Bairagi, Patwari prepared a forged map showing Survey no. 175/6 situated adjacent to the Barbar - Rajgarh main road. The forged map was prepared to cause wrongful loss to the complainant. Accused Sarita Pipada and Jyoti Pipada filed a civil suit registered at RCS no. 41-A of 2017 on the basis of forged map and applied for injunction. The trial Court rejected the application for injunction vide order dated 15/03/2017. The Additional Collector, Ratlam had inquired into the forged map prepared by accused Ramesh Chandra Bairagi. The complainant had submitted a written complaint dated 26/09/2017 to the Superintendent of Police, Ratlam, but no action was taken, therefore, it is prayed that the accused be prosecuted for offence punishable under sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 120-B of the IPC. The application under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C was also filed along with the complaint requesting for forwarding the complaint and directing the SHO of Police Station – Industrial Area, Ratlam to register FIR against the accused.

B. The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ratlam, vide order dated 11/12/2017 forwarded the complaint to the SHO, Industrial Area, Ratlam with endorsement to the effect that the SHO shall file detail inquiry report at the earliest. The SHO of Police Station – Industrial Area, Ratlam submitted the report that prima-facie, no offence is made out against the accused and the dispute between the parties is pending in appeal before the Commissioner, Ujjain. Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, vide order dated 06/04/2018 again forwarded the complaint directing the SHO of Police Station – Industrial Area, Ratlam to conduct an inquiry under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C and submit the report. Learned Judicial Magistrate opined that the complaint contains manipulation of documents and cheating by forgery. In compliance with the directions, the Police Station – Industrial Area, Ratlam registered FIR at Crime no. 264 of 2018 for offence punishable under sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 120-B of the IPC on 10/05/2018.

3.