Rajendra Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1126152
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnFeb-10-2014
AppellantRajendra Patel
RespondentThe State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta
Excerpt:
m.cr.c.no.4954/2012 23.1.2014 shri d.d.jaiswal, counsel for the applicant. heard on ia. no.26616/2012, an application for condonation of delay. only the delay of four days has been caused in filing the application for leave to appeal. looking to the period of delay, it would be proper to condone the delay. ia. no.26616/2012 is hereby allowed. 4 days delay in filing the application is hereby condoned. heard on admission. the facts of the case in short are that the applicant moved a complaint before the trial court that on 12.4.2007 a contract took place between four purchasers including the applicant with sodan singh that he would sell his land for a particular amount and out of the shares of the purchasers the applicant was required to pay a sum of rs.62,500/-. the applicant gave a cheque of rs.50,000/- to sodan singh. thereafter, no contract took place. when the appliant demanded the amount back then salamuddin, who was the intervener in the contract, told that his amount will be returned but, ultimately it was not returned and therefore, the applicant filed a criminal complaint against sodan singh and salamuddin. the learned jmfc, bhopal in criminal case no.23004/2008 vide order dated 16.2.2012 acquitted the respondents. after considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, it would be apparent that the accused sodan singh was the main accused in the case who, took the money from the applicant though the land was not in his name but, sodan singh during the pendency of the criminal case died and therefore, the criminal complaint filed against sodan singh was abated. the applicant could not prove that the respondent no.2 knew that the land was not in the name of sodan singh and he was not capable to sell. under such circumstances, if the respondent no.2 directed to applicant to provide the money to sodan singh then it cannot be said that he participated in the cheating etc.if the respondent no.2 was not successful in getting repayment of the money from the respondent no.1 then it may not constitute any offence against him. under such circumstances, the respondent no.2 was rightly acquitted by the trial court. there is no reason by which any interference can be done in the judgment of acquittal. if appeal is considered for hearing then it cannot succeed and therefore, there is no ground to grant leave to appeal. consequently, the application for leave to appeal filed by the applicant s.r.chouksey is hereby dismissed. leave is refused. copy of the order be sent to the trial court for information. (n.k.gupta) judge bina
Judgment:

M.Cr.C.No.4954/2012 23.1.2014 Shri D.D.Jaiswal, counsel for the applicant.

Heard on IA.

No.26616/2012, an application for condonation of delay.

Only the delay of four days has been caused in filing the application for leave to appeal.

Looking to the period of delay, it would be proper to condone the delay.

IA.

No.26616/2012 is hereby allowed.

4 days delay in filing the application is hereby condoned.

Heard on admission.

The facts of the case in short are that the applicant moved a complaint before the trial Court that on 12.4.2007 a contract took place between four purchasers including the applicant with Sodan Singh that he would sell his land for a particular amount and out of the shares of the purchasers the applicant was required to pay a sum of Rs.62,500/-.

The applicant gave a cheque of Rs.50,000/- to Sodan Singh.

Thereafter, no contract took place.

When the appliant demanded the amount back then Salamuddin, who was the intervener in the contract, told that his amount will be returned but, ultimately it was not returned and therefore, the applicant filed a criminal complaint against Sodan Singh and Salamuddin.

The learned JMFC, Bhopal in Criminal Case No.23004/2008 vide order dated 16.2.2012 acquitted the respondents.

After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, it would be apparent that the accused Sodan Singh was the main accused in the case who, took the money from the applicant though the land was not in his name but, Sodan Singh during the pendency of the criminal case died and therefore, the criminal complaint filed against Sodan Singh was abated.

The applicant could not prove that the respondent no.2 knew that the land was not in the name of Sodan Singh and he was not capable to sell.

Under such circumstances, if the respondent no.2 directed to applicant to provide the money to Sodan Singh then it cannot be said that he participated in the cheating etc.If the respondent no.2 was not successful in getting repayment of the money from the respondent no.1 then it may not constitute any offence against him.

Under such circumstances, the respondent no.2 was rightly acquitted by the trial Court.

There is no reason by which any interference can be done in the judgment of acquittal.

If appeal is considered for hearing then it cannot succeed and therefore, there is no ground to grant leave to appeal.

Consequently, the application for leave to appeal filed by the applicant S.R.Chouksey is hereby dismissed.

Leave is refused.

Copy of the order be sent to the trial Court for information.

(N.K.Gupta) Judge bina