The court upheld the cognizance of fraud against one accused while dismissing charges against his sisters due to lack of evidence of conspiracy.

Order

1. Impugned order in both the petitions is common i.e. order dated 05.04.2021 passed by District & Sessions Judge, Karauli in Criminal Revision No.03/2021 whereby and whereunder revision has been partly allowed and the order dated 29.01.2021 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karauli, taking cognizance of offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 , 471 & 120-B of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘ IPC ’) on the protest petition filed by the complainant against the negative final report submitted by the police in connection with FIR No.404/2018 registered at Police Station, Karauli, has been interfered with by the Revisional Court in the manner that:

(i) Cognizance of offences under Sections 467, 468 , 471 & 120-B of IPC has been quashed qua accused Mahendra Singh, but cognizance of offence under Section 420 of IPC against him has been sustained and he has been allowed to be summoned by issuing process through summon at the first instance and if the presence is not viable, then by issuing bailable warrant and arrest warrant, instead of summoning through non-bailable warrant at the first instance, and

(ii) Cognizance for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 , 471 & 120-B of IPC against sisters of accused Mahendra Singh, namely, Sugan Kanwar, Sushila Kanwar, Raj Kanwar, Santosh Kanwar, Gayatri Devi, has been quashed and the complaint against these five women accused has been dismissed.

2. S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.555/2021 titled as Anil Jain Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors. has been led by the complainant, challenging the order dated 05.04.2021 to the extent of quashing the cognizance against accused Mahendra Singh under offences under Sections 467, 468 , 471 & 120-B of IPC as also against rejection of his criminal complaint (protest petition) against five women accused named herein-above and seeking to restore the order of cognizance dated 29.01.2021 as also summoning the accused presence through non-bailable warrants.

3. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.3821/2021 titled as Mahendra Singh Versus State of Rajasthan & Anr., has been led by accused Mahendra Singh, challenging the order dated 05.04.2021 to the extent of affirming the order of cognizance dated 29.01.2021 of taking cognizance for offence under Section 420 of IPC against him and seeking to quash the order of cognizance dated 29.01.2021 in toto.

4. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record carefully.

5. The relevant facts, as culled out from the record, in nutshell, are that:-

5.1 On filing a written report by complainant – Anil Jain, one FIR bearing No.404/2018 was registered on 16.11.2018 at Police Station, Karauli, for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 , 471 & 506 of IPC . The complainant levelled allegations in the written report that one Mahendra Singh and his five sisters, namely, Sugan Kanwar, Sushila Kanwar, Raj Kanwar, Santosh Kanwar, Gayatri Devi, all son and daughters of Late Shri Ummed Singh, have cheated him and grabbed Rs.1,11,00,000/- by hatching a conspiracy and preparing forged documents. His allegation is that agricultural lands in question were belonging to Late Shri Ummed Singh and after his death, accused Mahendra Singh got mutation of lands in question in his sole name on 07.06.1999 by producing a forged succession list before the Tehsildar. His allegation is that on the basis of such mutation, Mahendra Singh agreed to sell the lands in question to complainant through agreement to sale dated 10.01.2016 and received a consideration of Rs.1,11,00,000/-. His allegation is that later on, Mahendra Singh got instituted an ambush revenue suit on 08.06.2017, through his five sisters under Section 88 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act before the Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Karauli, wherein sisters claimed that lands in question were belonging to their father Late Shri Ummed Singh, who after his death, was survived by one son and five daughters, but their brother Mahendra Singh, by concealing