Naheed Ara Moonis, J. - (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajendra Singh, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the complainant as well as the learned A.G.A. for the state and have taken through the record.
(2.) The instant 482 petition has been filed on behalf of the applicant invoking inherent power of this court to quash the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.11, Varanasi dated 9.3.2016 whereby the Criminal Revision No. 362 of 2015 preferred by the opposite party no. 2 against the order dated 5.10.2015 passed by the learned Magistrate rejecting the Complaint Case No. 628 of 2014, under Section 203 Cr.P.C. has been allowed and the order dated 12.12.2016 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Varanasi in Complaint Case No. 3492 of 2016 whereby the applicant has been summoned to face trial under Sections 419 and 420 I.P.C.
(3.) The factual matrix of the case in short conspectus is that the opposite party no. 2 moved an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the court of Judicial Magistrate Court No.3, Varanasi against the applicant on 25.9.2014, which was numbered as Misc. case No. 277 of 2014 stating therein that the complainant and his real brother Mahendra are resident of village Barai, police station Chaubeypur, district Varanasi, complainant's mother Ranno Devi was initially married with one Ram Nath and out of their wedlock the applicant Rajendra Yadav was born and after the death of Ram Nath, Ranno Devi performed second marriage with Buddhu and out of their wedlock the opposite party no. 2 and Mahendra were born. The mother of the complainant was residing together with the applicant as the complainant and his brother Mahendra were minor at that time. One Lakhantu Yadav had executed an agreement to sale in respect of plot in question with the mother of the complainant on 27.9.1981. The aforesaid papers were taken away by the applicant Rajendra Yadav later on he executed a forged sale deed by impersonating Lakhantu Yadav through another person on 12.10.2011 and thereafter the name of the complainant and his brother Mahendra got mutated along with Rajendra Yadav and thereafter the applicant is trying to sale the property surreptitiously. The person named Lakhantu Yadav from whom he is laying a claim upon the land has stated that he has never executed any sale deed in favour of Rajednra the present applicant. The applicant is in habit of executing fake and forged sale deed by showing his parentage as son of Buddhu and had also obtained ration card, family register, driving license etc. showing him as son of Buddhu when the father of the applicant Rajendra is not Buddhu but Ram Nath. In this regard a complaint was made to the police authority through registered post but no action was taken and no first information report was registered, hence the complaint was filed with the prayer that the applicant has committed cognizable offence and is liable to be prosecuted under sections 419, 420, 468 and 471 I.P.C. The applicant has also embezzled money and truck which cannot be recovered without the help of police. Hence the concerned station officer be directed to register the same and investigate into the matter.;