BILAM SINGH RANAWAT Vs. STATE AND OTHERS
LAWS(UTN)-2013-8-102
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on August 12,2013

Bilam Singh Ranawat Appellant
VERSUS
STATE AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The complainant (revisionist herein) Bilam Singh Ranawat filed a criminal complaint case against the accused persons, namely, Swami Achutanand, Rajeev Thapliyal, Ramesh Rawat and Anil Kumar Yadav for summoning and convicting them under Sections 323, 420, 504 and 506 of I.P.C. and under Section 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.
(2.) The complainant entered into the witness box under Section 200 Cr.P.C. PW1 Smt. Radha, PW2 Purnima Ramola, PW3 Dharampal and PW4 Kripal Singh were examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. Certified copies of plaints were also filed alongwith a copy of the power of attorney and original agreement dated 29.06.2004. After considering the statements and documents filed on behalf of the complainant, learned Special Judge (Gangster Act), Dehradun did not find it to be a fit case for summoning the accused persons to face the trial. The complaint was therefore, dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C., vide impugned order dated 09.04.2007. Aggrieved against the impugned order passed by Special Judge (Gangster Act), Dehradun, present criminal revision was preferred by the complainant-revisionist.
(3.) The complainant-revisionist gave the details of the property owned by accused no. 1, as disclosed to him by accused no. 2, who was the holder of the power of attorney on behalf of accused no. 1. The complainant said that, on believing the power of attorney to be true, he entered into an agreement to sell with the accused persons, who were acting as land mafia. The complainant-revisionist was a Software Engineer and was also a part-time investor in the property. He said that he gave Rs. 5 lacs to accused no. 2, but he did not execute the sale-deed in his (revisionist's) favour.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.