Full Judgment
13. 01.2012 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 25.06.2011 passed in Complaint Case No. 305 of 2011 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Katihar while finding a prima facie case against the petitioners has been pleased to issue summons for trial for the offence punishable under Sections 418 and 467 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the land in question had been purchased by one Bibi Kadbano @ Sahar Banoo from one Ajimuddin way back in the year 1972 and a copy of the sale deed is placed at Annexure-4. It is stated that the land in question i.e. plot bearing Khata No. 225 Plot No. 8140 having an area of 0.43 decimals situated in Mauza Amdabad in the District of Katihar was subsequently purchased by Bibi Guljan on 15.12.2004 from Bibi Kadbano @ Sahar Banoo by a registered sale deed placed at Annexure-5. On the basis of the sale deed present at Annexure-5 a mutation was effected and the name was mutated in the Revenue records. Subsequently, Bibi Kadbano @ Sahar Banoo executed a second sale deed for the same piece of land in favour of Bibi Atori Khatoon the mother of the complainant in the year 2008 placed at Annexure-6 and following which a mutation appeal was filed by the 2 mother of the complainant and which is pending before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Katihar. Learned counsel further submits that even while the matter is pending consideration before the Revenue Court fully vested with the powers for adjudication in the matter, the complainant nowhere connected for the transaction in question has filed the complaint in question alleging a preparation of a forged Panchnama by the petitioners. It is stated that the Panchnama is not even part of the complaint petition nor the details thereof can be found from the recitals thereof. It is submitted that the complainant not being a person aggrieved and the matter pending consideration before the revenue authorities, the complaint in question is manifestly attended with mala fides. Issue notice to the opposite party No.2 under ordinary process as well as registered cover for which requisites etc. may be filed within one week, failing which this application as against the concerned opposite party shall stand dismissed. Put up this case after receipt of the same. In the meantime further proceeding in Complaint Case No.305 of 2011 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Katihar shall remain stayed. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J.)