Suraj Pal vs State of Uttarakhand and others

Hon''ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.—By way of this petition, the challenge is to the order of cognizance on the submission of chargesheet No.21 of 2008 pertaining to crime no.588/2007 against the petitioner/ applicant Suraj Pal. The prayer has been made to quash the said chargesheet and the entire proceedings of case no.1043 of 2008 pending in the court of CJM, Haridwar for the offences of Section 406, 420 and 120-B IPC.

Having heard the learned counsel of either party, it appears that one Sri Sophie Ram died nine years before the lodging of the FIR by his son Subhash Kumar. The report was lodged on 22.12.2007 regarding the fraudulent transaction of a shop, which was left by Sophie Ram to be succeeded by his sons and daughters. Sophie Ram was succeeded by his three sons Vijay Pal, Subhash Kumar and Ashok Kumar as well as two daughters Krishna Rani and Surekha. All these five brothers and sisters inherited three shops and one residential house from their father Sophie Ram. It is significant to mention that without making a family partition, the brothers, particularly, Ashok and Subhash started selling the shops. Firstly, a sale deed on 18.3.2005 was executed by one brother Ashok Kumar to the petitioner Suraj Pal for a consideration of Rs.1.10 lacs, later the same shop was again sold by Ashok Kumar and Subhash together to Deepak Kumar on 9.9.2005 for Rs.2.00 lacs. One of the brothers, Subhash Kumar sold another shop, along with his two sisters, on dated 10.3.2008 to Smt. Mani Manju Shah. The FIR was lodged by one brother Subhash Kumar on dated 22.12.2007, which, after investigation, was resulted in submission of chargesheet no.21/2008 against Ashok Kumar and Suraj Pal. Now, this petition has been filed by Suraj Pal only as the co-accused Ashok Kumar has confessed his guilt vide Annexure CA3 of the counter affidavit filed by Subhash Kumar.

Having heard learned counsel of either party, the Court is of the view that the dispute, pertaining to submission of chargesheet, which is awaiting trial in the Court of Magistrate, is not interferable by this Court because the malafides of petitioner Suraj Pal, in purchasing the shop for a meager consideration, knowingly that the same is owned by five persons, is not beyond any shadow of doubt, inasmuch as, he purchased the shop in question only from Ashok Kumar, while the same was owned by five persons. Petitioner and the owner of the shop are the residents of the same locality. So, it is difficult to accept that the petitioner was ignorant about the combined ownership over the shop in question. The Investigating Officer has not committed any illegality or irregularity in submitting the impugned chargesheet. Filing of this petition, u/s 482 Cr.P.C., is a clear cut abuse of the process of law and a stunt in the quick dispensation of justice, and the same thus, cannot be encouraged. The petition is totally meritless and deserves to be dismissed. It is, accordingly, dismissed, thereby vacating the stay order dated 25.4.2008 granted by this Court.