Writ Petition No.2394/2010
16.7.2010
Shri Sameer Dhage, learned counsel for the
petitioners.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that typed copies of the hand-written documents have been
filed forming part of challan. The same be taken on record.
I.A. No. 2157/10 is rendered redundant.
Heard on admission.
Being prosecuted for an offence under Section 341,
294, 324, 506/34 IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) Scheduled Caste/
Scheduled Tribe Atrocities Act, the petitioners have filed this
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking
direction for the Magisterial inquiry in Crime No. 17/09 in
Crime No. 17/2009 in Sessions Trial No. 1/2010 pending
before the Special Judge, Mandla on the ground that the
petitioners have been falsely implicated.
The petitioners claim to be the owner of land bearing
Khasra No. 180 (old No. 135) PH No. 51, admeasuring 9.81
acres, situated at Village Bhenga Dungaria, district Mandla
on the basis of registered sale-deed dated 22.4.2004.
The said piece of land seems to be the centre of
controversy. As because initially, as the facts stand, it
belonged to respondent No. 3, when the same was
purchased in auction on 30.12.1975 (as per auction
proceedings) in Revenue Case No. 60 (A-79) 6A/65) by one
Shyambihari S/o Ambika soni from whom subsequent
purchase was made by one Pushpa Shrivastava wife of late
2
Parmeshwardayal Shrivastava, who sold the same to the
petitioner on 22.4.2004.
During the holding of land in question by Pushpa
Shrivastava, in the year 2003, i.e., on 23.6.2003, the
respondent NO. 3 invoked Section 170 of M.P. Land
Revenue Code, 1959 for return of land. However, in the year
2007, on 7.6.2007, when the petitioner made efforts to
occupy the land, the same, led to filing of civil suit wherein
certain interim orders were passed in favour of the
petitioners.
It appears from the documents on record that some
incident took place on 1.11.2009 in the process of
petitioners’ asserting their right over the property in question,
which led to registering of an offence under Sections 341,
294, 324, 506, 34 IPC and 3 (i) (x) of Scheduled Caste &
Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Subsequently, the challan has been filed and as per the
submission by learned counsel for the petitioners, the
charges are also framed by the trial courts.
In view of these facts the plea for having a Magisterial
enquiry cannot be acceded to, apparently for the reasons
that, the petitioners are facing trial on the charge under
Sections 341, 294, 324, 506, 34 IPC and 3 (i) (x) of
Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989. Because if a Magisterial enquiry is
ordered the same would prejudice the entire case pending
before the Additional Sessions Judge.
3
Thus, keeping in view the totality of facts, no
interference is warranted in view of the fact that the charges
under Sections 341, 294, 324, 506, 34 IPC and 3 (i) (x) of
Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 are framed and the petitioners are
facing a trial.
In the result petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
However, no costs.
(SANJAY YADAV)
JUDGE
VT