P.K.Jain, J. - (1.) Heard Shri H.M. Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist and Shri Rakesh Singh Sengar, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2.
(2.) The opposite party No. 2 moved an application before the Court below praying for a direction to the police of the police station concerned to register a case under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C. on allegations that the applicant is Pradhan of the village. Some residential and some agricultural land was reserved by the Gaon Sabha for allotment of Harijans. The accused who had been Pradhan of the said Gaon Sabha called for a meeting of the Gaon Sabha on 20.2.1994 and passed a resolution to allot the land. It was, however, clear in the resolution that map regarding allotment of the land to each of the allottee shall be prepared. Allotment was made according to the said resolution and the record was sent to Tehsildar on 12.6.1994 but the Kanoongo made a note on the said report that the allottees are having residential land with them and therefore, allotment of the land may be cancelled. Still on 5.7.1994 the accused obtained money from the allottees and issued receipts to them. All the receipts were fictitious and no money was deposited in the Gaon Sabha account and the money was misappropriated and embezzled by the accused.
(3.) The learned Magistrate called for a report from the police station concerned, in which the police reported that the receipts issued by the Pradhan were genuine and amount received by him was deposited in the bank and Bank was informed. However the learned Magistrate was not satisfied with the report and he passed another order dated 2.1.1997 calling for report of Revenue authorities. Thereafter the case was by order dated 27.2.1997 transferred to A.C.J.M. III, who passed the impugned order dated 7.4.1997 directing the Station Officer of Police Station Phaphund, district Etawah to register the case and investigate and submit report within ten days.;