Final Order 1

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
32ND COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI.
C.C. No. 53/SW/2020
Radheshyam Singh .. Complainant
V/s.
Sandhya Bavankule +9 .. Accused
ORDER BELOW EXH. 1
Complainant present. Heard the Ld. Advocate cum
complainant at length. The complainant filed written notes of argument at
Exh7. Perused the complaint supported by documents and report of
investigation vide section 202 of Cr.P.C.
2. In this complaint the complainant wants to issue process
against all accused under sections 218 & 420 r/w 34 of IPC. It is the
contention of the complainant that his house at Bhagwate Wadi, Dayaldas
Road, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai and it is known as Sai Nagar SRA Co
operative Housing Society. He contended that in that SRA society alleged
accused persons had not allotted house to proper and eligible persons and
now in that houses other persons were residing who were not eligible
persons as per SRA Scheme. The report of police under section 202 of
Cr.P.C. discloses that alleged accused Nos. 6 to 10 purchased said houses
from different persons and developer by sale deed. It further discloses that
alleged accused Nos. 1 to 5 are Govenment Servants and they worked as
per their official duty and when they received the complaint of
complainant, they verified the persons i.e. owners of SRA and who are not
the owners then they initiated action against them. As per police report, it
-- 1 of 3 --
2
reflects that Vrujesh Shah sold his SRA hut to Arjun and Sunita Bedarkar
and Suresh Rahate purchases said hut from Mehboob Khan and developer
handed over possession of said hut to Mr. Rahate on 11.09.2018. It further
denotes that Paresh Jadhav purchased said hut from developer from his
Quota. Mukesh Rathod himself had given letter to SRA office and deleted
his name. It no where reflects the ingredients of cheating and other
offences. The police report is negative and it is adverse to the contentions
of complainant.
3. Section 218 of IPC denotes public servant framing incorrect
record or writing with intent to save person from punishment or property
from forfeiture. Section 420 of IPC is about cheating and dishonestly
inducing delivery of property. The allegations and the facts of the case
does not covered under the definition of cheating and other offence. In this
case, no ingredients of alleged sections are attracting and therefore, it is
not a fit case to issue process against all accused. There is no sufficient
ground to proceed further. Hence, the following order.
ORDER
The case is dismissed.
Date : 20.01.2023
ssl
(Smt. A.M. Shah)
Metropolitan Magistrate, 32nd Court,
Bandra, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 3 --
-- 3 of 3 --