MUKESH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-2014-7-951
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on July 24,2014

MUKESH KUMAR SHARMA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for issuance of appropriate directions and for handing over the investigation in FIR No.525 dated 20.11.2008 registered under sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Civil Lines Amritsar to some other independent agency.
(2.) Briefly, the facts are as follows: Shambhu Nath, father of Mukesh Kumar Sharma petitioner and Baij Nath, father of respondents No.5 & 6 were real brothers. Baij Nath owned 10 Marlas of land in Khasra No.401, whereas Shambhu Nath owned 10 Marlas of land comprised in Khasra No.402, situated in village Chabba, District Amritsar. Shambhu Nath died on 11.5.1987 and Baij Nath died on 27.5.1992. A mutation of inheritance in respect of Khasra No.402 relating to the estate of Shambhu Nath, father of the petitioner was sanctioned in 2005 in the name of petitioner and his brothers namely Kuldip Kumar, Pardeep Kumar, Varinder Kumar and Avinash Rani mother of petitioner. The mutation with respect to the estate of Baij Nath in respect of Khasra No.401 was sanctioned in favour of respondents No.5 & 6. Thus, the successors of Shambhu Nath and Baij Nath came in possession of their respective holdings. The allegations made by the petitioner are that respondents No.5 & 6 hatched a conspiracy in connivance with Patwari and the Kanungo, whereby they forged and fabricated the document of exchange dated 6.6.1981 to the effect that Shambhu Nath, father of the petitioner had given his plot comprised in Khasra No.402 to Baij Nath in exchange of a four Marla house of Muslim property and half share in a joint Thara measuring 1 Marrla situated in the abadi.
(3.) The case of the petitioner is that the exchange deed never saw the light of the day during the life time of Shambhu Nath and Baij Nath and Ashwani Kumar and Rachhpal Chand attributed verification to the oral exchange by forging the signatures and then filed an application before the S.D.M. for sanction of mutation. It was pleaded that the application was marked to the Naib Tehsildar, who in routine marked it to the Patwari, who was himself involved in the conspiracy and the mutation was thereby sanctioned on 16.3.2006 without any notice to the petitioner or his brothers.;


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