JHARKHAND HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON ANIL KUMAR V/S THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

RANCHI, India, May 7 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on April 6:

1. It appears from the order dated 27.02.2025 that opposite party No.7 has already died during pendency of this revision application and this criminal revision has already been abated so far as opposite party No.7 is concerned. Another affidavit filed by learned counsel for the State and opposite parties with regard to life status of O.P. Nos.3 and 4 reveals that O.P. No.3, Parwati Devi has already been died three years ago and O.P. No.4-Gayatri Devi is alive but it was informed that her correct name is Savitri Devi not Gayatri Devi, which was confirmed by her AADHAR Card.

2. Considering the above, this criminal revision, therefore, stands abated so far as appellant No.3 is concerned and the name of O.P. No.4 is modified to the extent that instead of "Gayatri Devi", henceforth, it may be read as "Savitri Devi". Accordingly, the names of surviving opposite parties, Surendra Ram S/o-Late Permeshwar Ram, Savitri Devi W/o-Late Narayan Ram, Sahdeo Yadav, S/o-Late Gajo Yadav, Lakshman Yadav, S/o-Sri Jhari Yadav, SibuBalwant, S/o-Munna Balwant, Gobind Yadav S/o-Bishun Yadav, Nageshwar Mehta have been renumbered and the criminal revision is heard on behalf of the aforesaid alive opposite parties.

3. Heard Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Spl.P.P. assisted by Mr. Avilash Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite parties.

4. The instant criminal revision has been filed against the judgment dated 18.04.2017 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Koderma in Cr. Appeal No.38 of 2015, whereby and whereunder learned appellate court has affirmed the judgment of acquittal dated 21.07.2015 passed in C. Case No.327 of 2007 by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma, whereby and whereunder learned trial court has acquitted the accused/opposite party Nos.2 to 8 for the offences charged under sections 120-B, 420, 467 and 468 of IPC.

Factual Matrix:-

5. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that the petitioner has filed a complaint case No.327 of 2007 stating inter alia that the ancestors of complainant had purchased a land by registered Sale Deed No.441 on 09.01.1968 from the ancestors of accused No.1 and relatives of accused Nos.2-4. It is further alleged that the ancestors of complainant Hari Ram also purchased a land by registered Sale Deed No.10710 on 08.07.1969 from the said accused and paid full consideration amount, gaining the possession over the vended land and doing cultivation on the said agricultural land. The alleged accused persons through a Power of attorney sold the said land to different purchasers by registered Sale Deed Nos.3679 and 3680 on 06.07.2006 without any title and possession. That the accused persons fraudulently prepared the void sale deed to oust the complainant from the land and transacted the money. Hence, the complainant made a written report to the concerned police station on 30.05.2007.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=eISc8sUCYnQFBVP%2BVeJCOJXsqJnkxYtxM74wFEVWaDucXEnfg1wtlaPUKQmwP9ya&caseno=Cr.Rev./750/2017&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010214492017&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.