SANDEEP MEHTA,J. - (1.) This second misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner Baldev Ram Prajapat seeking quashing of the FIR No. 156/2016 registered at the Police Station Udaimandir, Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 466, 471 and 193 IPC.
(2.) It is relevant to note here that the earlier misc. petition No. 1810/2016 preferred by the petitioner with the very same prayer was disposed of by this Court on 02.11.2017 giving liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the investigating authority which, in turn, was directed to consider the same in accordance with law before completing the investigation. The petitioner has alleged in the instant misc. petition that he duly submitted a representation to the investigating officer in terms of the direction given by this Court while deciding the aforesaid misc. petition but the I.O. is not properly considering the same.
(3.) Shri M.R. Singhvi learned Sr. Counsel assisted by learned counsel Shri Bhavit Sharma representing the petitioner vehemently urged that the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed on the following grounds: (I) that the petitioner is the registered owner of the disputed plot and as such, he cannot be held responsible for the offences alleged. (ii) that the Civil Court, whilst deciding the suit for temporary injunction filed by Nahar Singh, power of attorney holder of Bhawani Singh, categorically held that the plaintiff could not establish irreparable loss, balance of convenience and prima facie case in his favour and that the petitioner appears to be the owner of the plot in question. It was further urged that the civil suit was thereafter withdrawn by Nahar Singh.;