Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUKHBIR SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sukhbir Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr - CRM-57526-2005 [2007] RD-P&H 1120 (1 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl. Misc. No. 57526 of 2005

Sukhbir Singh

.... PETITIONER

Versus

State of Punjab and another

..... RESPONDENTS

Present: Mr. H.S. Dhandi, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr. N.S. Gill, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. H.S. Dhillon, Advocate,

for respondent No.2.

Crl. Misc. No. 60228 of 2006

Darshan Singh

.... PETITIONER

Versus

State of Punjab and others

..... RESPONDENTS

Present: Mr. H.S. Dhillon, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr. N.S. Gill, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. H.S. Dhandi, Advocate,

for respondents No.2 to 5.

DATE OF DECISION : 19.01.2007

* * *

This order shall dispose of Crl. Misc. No. 57526 of 2005 and Crl. Misc. No. 60228 of 2006, filed under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for transfer of the cases.

2. Crl. Misc. No. 57526 of 2005 has been filed by Sukhbir Singh (accused) for transfer of a complaint dated 12.10.1999, titled as Darshan Singh versus Sukhbir Singh and others, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar, to the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Samrala, District Ludhiana. Crl. Misc. No. 60228 of 2006 has been filed by Darshan Singh for transfer of FIR No. 40 dated 22.5.1998 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Samrala and a criminal complaint dated 8.10.1999, titled as Darshan Singh versus Sukhbir Singh and others, pending in the court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala to the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar.

3. In this case, Darshan Singh (hereinafter referred to as `complainant'), who allege himself to be 70 years old, is owner of certain lands situated in villages Fatehgarh, Arnauli, Kinnaur, Sub Tehsil Morinda, District Ropar. As per his allegations, his wife Smt. Mukhtiar Kaur, in connivance with her sister's son Sukhbir Singh (hereinafter referred to as `the accused') hatched a criminal conspiracy to cheat and deprive him of his valuable land. In this regard, it has been alleged that in pursuance of the said conspiracy, a forged and fabricated power of attorney of the complainant was got executed and registered on 9.1.1998 at Samrala, District Ludhiana.

On the basis of this power of attorney, accused Sukhbir Singh and others in connivance with Smt. Mukhtiar Kaur got transferred 22-23 acres of land belonging to the complainant vide a registered sale deed dated 26.3.1999 at Morinda, District Ropar. When complainant came to know about the forged power of attorney dated 9.1.1998, he got registered FIR No. 40 dated 22.5.1998 at Police Station Samrala under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, against his wife Mukhtiar Kaur and her nephew Sukhbir Singh accused and others.

4. When Sukhbir Singh and others applied for sanction of mutation in their favour on the basis of the aforesaid sale deed, the complainant made an application before the District Revenue Officer, Ropar, for not sanctioning the mutation. In the said application, an inquiry was made and during the inquiry, it was found that thumb impression of the complainant was not tallying with the thumb impression on the alleged forged power of attorney. Thereafter, on the basis of report made by the District Magistrate, Ropar, FIR No. 62 dated 17.9.1998 under Section 471 IPC was registered at Police Station Morinda on account of the fact that the illegal sale deed was got executed fraudulently at Morinda.

5. In FIR No. 40 dated 22.5.1998, registered at Police Station Samrala, police prepared cancellation report. Then on 8.10.1999, the complainant filed a criminal complaint in the court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala, with regard to the allegations contained in FIR No. 40. In the said complaint, preliminary evidence was recorded, but no summoning order has been passed. This complaint is pending at Samrala.

6. In FIR No. 62 dated 17.9.1998 also, the police has prepared cancellation report. On that, the complainant also filed a criminal complaint dated 12.10.1999 in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar, in which, vide order dated 7.8.2002, the accused have been summoned. The said criminal complaint is pending at Ropar.

7. Now, both the parties have filed the aforesaid petitions for transfer of the cases. Accused Sukhbir Singh wants that complaint dated 12.10.1999, filed by complainant Darshan Singh be transferred from the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar to the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Samrala, where another complaint filed by the complainant on 22.5.1998 as well as FIR No. 40 dated 22.5.1998, registered at Police Station Samrala, are pending. On the other hand, complainant Darshan Singh seeks transfer of FIR No. 40 and criminal complaint dated 22.5.1998 from the court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala to the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar.

8. I have heard counsel for the parties.

9. It is case of the accused Sukhbir Singh that transfer of criminal complaint dated 12.10.1999 from Ropar to Samrala will be in a general convenience of the parties and the witnesses and is expedient, because the earlier complaint filed by complainant Darshan Singh is pending at Samrala.

On the other hand, case of the complainant Darshan Singh is that he is an old person and already an attempt was made to kidnap him, for which FIR No. 5 dated 5.1.1999 was registered at Police Station Chamkaur Sahib under Sections 382, 364, 344, 323, 34 IPC, against the accused, in which they were convicted by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar on 5.12.2000. It is further stated that the land, which is subject matter of the alleged sale deeds, which were got executed on the basis of the forged and fabricated power of attorney, also situate in District Ropar.

10. Though cancellation report was recommended in FIR No. 62 dated 17.9.1998 under Section 471 IPC registered at Police Station Morinda, but the matter is still pending consideration and the complaint dated 12.10.1999 filed by Darshan Singh complainant pertaining to this FIR is also pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar, in which the accused have been summoned. In the complaint dated 8.10.1999, filed by Darshan Singh pertaining to FIR No. 40 dated 22.5.1998, which is pending in the court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala, preliminary evidence has been recorded, but no summoning order has been passed.

11. Thus, keeping in view the facts that (a) complainant Darshan Singh is 70 years old and is residing in District Ropar; (b) the land in question is situated in District Ropar; (c) the sale deeds were got executed on the basis of alleged forged and fabricated power of attorney in District Ropar; (d) in the complaint pending at Ropar, the accused have already been summoned; and (e) the FIR No. 62 dated 17.9.1998 is also pending in District Ropar, I deem it appropriate to transfer FIR No. 40 dated 22.5.1998 and complaint dated 8.10.1999 from the court at Samrala to the court at Ropar, in the interest of justice.

12. Consequently, Crl. Misc. No. 57526 of 2005, filed by accused Sukhbir Singh for transfer of complaint dated 12.10.1999 is dismissed.

However, Crl. Misc. No. 60228 of 2006, filed by complainant Darshan Singh is allowed and case FIR No. 40 dated 22.5.1998 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Samrala, District Ludhiana and complaint dated 8.10.1999 are transferred from the court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samrala to the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar.

January 19, 2007 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.