Interim Order 1

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: C. C. No. 295/MISC./2021
ORDER BELOW EXH.1
Read the complaint. Perused the documents placed on record.
Heard Ld. Advocate for complainant.
2. According to the complainant accused person has fabricated
the false documents in order to get more FSI. The accused is Proprietor of
M/s. A G Park Constructions. He entered into the Development Agreement
dated 29/12/2005. However, after completion of development of the
building of society and taking possession of flats by the respective
members, they noticed that, the accused has not constructed the building,
as agreed. They further noticed that, the accused has fabricated false
documents with intention to utilize the additional FSI and to earn huge
money. He caused loss to the society. Thus, as per the case of complainant
the accused committed an cognizable offence and inspite of complaint
made to police no action taken by the police, therefore, prayed that,
matter be sent to police for further investigation.
3. Ld. Advocate for complainant relied on the case of Iqbal Singh
Marwah and Another V/s. Meenakshi Marwah and Anothers reported in
(2005) 4 SCC 370. On the point of bar under section 195 of Cr. P. C.
wherein the Hon’ble Apex court discussed the scope and the applicability
of section 195 of Cr. P. C. and held that, the said bar would be attracted
only when the offence enumerated in section 195 (1(b)(ii))of Cr. P. C.
have been committed with respective documents after it has been
produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in a court.
4. Ld. Advocate further relied on the case of Lalitakumari V/s
Government of UP reported in (2014) 2SCC, wherein it has been held
that, the registration of F.I.R. is mandatory under section 154 of Cr. P. C. if
the information discloses commission of cognizable offence and no
preliminary inquriy is permissible in such situation.
-- 1 of 2 --
~2~
5. I have gone through the entire proceeding. It appears that,
there are agreements between the parties regarding redevelopment of
society. Even it appears that, the complainant society has filed the suit
against the accused. The complainant can make out his case on the
document upon which he relied. Therefore, I am of opinion that, it is not
fit case for issuing direction under section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. So far as the cited case laws
(supra) are concerned facts of the
cited case
(supra) and present case are all together different. Therefore,
the ratio laid down in cited cases
(supra) are not applicable to present
case. Therefore, the prayer of complainant to that effect is hereby rejected.
The complainant is at liberty to lead his evidence under section 200 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
Place : Mumbai.
Date: 05/06/2024.
Sd/-
(A. B. Jadhav)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
71st Court, Bandra, Mumbai
Dictated on :- 05/06/2024.
Transcribed on :- 05/06/2024.
Checked on :- 05/06/2024.
Signed on :- 05/06/2024.
SRD
-- 2 of 2 --