Chattisgarh High Court
Avinash Peswani vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 5 April, 2021
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 283 of 2021
Avinash Peswani S/o Shri Suresh Peswani, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Flat No. 207, Shilapark Apartment, Rajkishore
Nagar, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
Note - Address of the Applicant Completely not mentioned in
impugned order.
---- Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station In-charge, P.S.
Civil Lines, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
---- Non-applicant
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Applicant : Shri Akash Shrivastava, Advocate
For Non-applicant/State : Shri Alok Nigam, Government Advocate
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order on Board
05/04/2021
1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section
438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail, as he is
apprehended his arrest in connection with Crime No.167/2021
registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur, Tahsil and District
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, for offence punishable under Sections 420
and 34 of Indian Penal Code.
2. Case of the prosecution in brief, is that, complainant Brajesh
Agrawal has lodged a written report mentioning therein that he is
sole owner and possession holder of the land bearing Khasra
No.454/57 measuring 0.04 hectares, Khasra No.454/58
measuring 0.14 hectares, Khasra No.454/59 measuring 0.023
hectares and Khasra No.454/61 measuring 0.023 hectares, which
he purchased through registered sale deed dated 24.07.2008
from Smt. Saroj Agrawal, Sharda Prasad Mishra, Rajendra
Agrawal and Sarju Prasad Mishra. The aforementioned land was
sold by Holaram Peswani vide registered sale deed dated
25.11.1985 in favour of Bisandas. Legal representatives of
Bisandas have sold the same land to different persons, from
whom, complainant has purchased the land through registered
sale deed. The said property was mortgaged through Union Bank
in the year 2010 and thereafter with Karnataka Bank in the year
2016. Holaram Peswani through his power of attorney holder
fraudulently through forged documents executed sale deed on
16.06.2020 in favour of Mahesh Kumar Agrawal. Based on written
complaint, aforementioned crime was registered against present
applicant.
3. Shri Akash Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant submits
that land bearing Khasra No.454/1 has been sold by Holaram
Peswani to Bisandas. Civil suit between Totaram Peswani v.
Holaram Peswani was decided in favour of Holaram Peswani and
Holaram Peswani has been declared to be sole owner and
possession holder of land mentioned therein including Khasra
No.454/1. Based on the decree passed in favour of Holaram
Peswani, application for correction of revenue records were made
and by virtue of order passed by Naib Tahsildar, revenue records
were corrected, thereafter, applicant has executed sale deed. He
further submits that applicant has not committed any offence as
alleged against him, hence, he may be enlarged on anticipatory
bail.
4. Per contra, Shri Alok Nigam, learned Government Advocate for
the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits
that applicant was well aware of the fact that Holaram Peswani
has sold the property bearing Khasra No.454/1 through registered
sale deed in the year 1985, a copy of which is placed on record as
Annexure A/2. This sale deed was not challenged and civil suit is
for the dispute inter-say between Holaram Peswani and Totaram
Peswani, who are relatives. He further submits that application
filed by applicant for correction in the revenue records in the Court
of Additional Tahsildar, Sakri, complainant was a party
respondent/non-applicant, but no notice has been sent to him
instead the proclamation was published. The complainant was not
aware about any proceeding as it was not made known to him
purposefully and after getting the name of Holaram Peswani
recorded in revenue records, land of complainant has been sold. It
is contended that there is prima facie material against the
applicant, hence, he is not entitled for anticipatory bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
6. The applicant has placed on record copy of sale deed dated
25.11.1985 by Holaram Peswani in favour of Bisandas. The sale
deed has been stated in the application to be a fraudulent
transaction, but it was not challenged. The judgment of civil suit is
with regard to inter-say dispute between Holaram Peswani and
Totaram Peswani, who are relatives and of same family. Applicant
has filed application for correction of revenue records, which is
recorded in the name of Brajesh Agrawal, who is not party to the
suit, but his name is recorded in the revenue records and without
giving notice of any proceeding to him, applicant got the revenue
records corrected and executed sale deed.
7. Taking into consideration the facts available in the case diary as
also appearing from the documents placed on record by the
applicant, I do not find it to be a fit case to release the applicant on
anticipatory bail.
8. Accordingly, anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Yogesh
