Amar Singh Chauhan, J. - (1.) Dr. Arun Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Ayank Misra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 are present. Heard and perused the material on record.
(2.) The applicants, through this application moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 29.11.2008 in Case Crime No. 2287 of 2008, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 166, 219 I.P.C., P.S. Cantt, District Gorakhpur, pending in the court of C.J.M., Gorakhpur and further prayed to stay the proceeding in the aforesaid case.
(3.) The brief facts which are requisite to be stated for the adjudication of the application are that the first information report was lodged by opposite party no. 2 that applicant no. 1 is the widow of Akmal Lari, applicant nos. 2 to 4 are the son of Akmal Lari and applicant no. 5 is the practising lawyer at District Gorakhpur who with the help of Collectorate namely Roopal Srivastava, made forged signature on the alleged compromise deed in the interest of rest of applicants and get mutated their name in the revenue record of the property in a forged manner. The said compromise was filed in the proceeding under Section 33/39 L.R. Act before the court of S.D.M., Sadar, Gorakhpur. On the basis of the compromise, the name of the complainant Aqram Lari was set aside and the applicants were got entered in the revenue record. The Investigating Officer after concluding the investigation, submitted the charge-sheet and consequently cognizance was taken by the Magistrate. Feeling aggrieved, the applicants came up before this court in this application.;