Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.45000 of 2008 ===================================================== 1. Renu Sharma, wife of Prahlad Sharma. 2. Anita Sharma, wife of Purushotam Sharma. Both residents of village-Hematpur, P.O. and P.S. Dighwara, District-Saran (Chapra). .... .... Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. District Magistrate-cum-District Registrar, Chapra, Saran. 3. The Sub-Registrar, Sonepur, Saran. 4. Jai Kumar, Sub-Registrar, Sonepur, Saran. .... .... Opposite Parties. ===================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : M/s. Anil Kumar Sinha and Mritunjay Kumar, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.4 : Mr. Binod Kumar Ambastha, Advocate. ===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA CAVORDER ----------------- 10 5-04-2012 The petitioners have approached this Court, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the First Information Report of Sonepur P.S. Case No.220 of 2008 registered on 14.10.2008 under [STATUTE] and Section 82 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, against the nine accused including the petitioners. 2. It appears that on the basis of the written report dated 14.10.2008 of the opposite party no.4, Jai Kumar, Sub- Registrar, Sonepur, Saran, Sonepur P.S. Case No.220 of 2008 was registered on 14.10.2008 under [STATUTE] and Section 82 of the Indian Registration Act Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45000 of 2008 (10) dt.05-04-2012 2 / 4 2 against the nine accused including the petitioners. The informant- opposite party no.4, has alleged in his written report that on 20.6.2005, sale deed nos.1973 and 1974 were registered. Similarly, sale deed no.2010 was registered on 21.6.2005. In sale deed no.1973, the vendors are Banti Singh, Rajesh Singh and Mukesh Kumar and the vendee is Smt. Renu Sharma (petitioner no.1). In sale deed no.1974, the vendors are Amar Singh and Teepu Singh and the vendee is Smt. Anita Sharma (petitioner no.2). In sale deed no.2010, the vendors are Abhishekh Singh and Vikash Kumar Singh and the vendees are Smt. Anira Sharma (petitioner no.2) and Smt. Renu Sharma (petitioner no.1). The aforesaid three sale deeds are in respect of one Katha land each, situated in village- Rai Patti, P.S. Dighwara and the valuation of the land in each sale deed has been shown as Rs.4,10,000/- and, accordingly, the stamp fees and registration fees have been deposited, but on complaint and on spot inspection, it was found that the houses were situated over the lands, as detailed in the aforesaid three sale deeds. As such, the valuation of each of the plot and house situated over the land is Rs.11,08,000/-, of which the registration fee payable is Rs.1,15,312/- but only Rs.42,700/- has been deposited as registration fees. While the steps were taken for the recovery of the deficit stamp fees but the same has Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45000 of 2008 (10) dt.05-04-2012 3 / 4 3 not been deposited. As such, only with a view to illegal gain and to cause illegal loss to the Government, knowingly the false statements have been given by the accused including the petitioners. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners made submission that the Inspector of the Registration, on enquiry, passed the order on 30.1.2008 to deposit the deficit court fees of Rs.72,612/- of each sale deed, as detailed in the First Information Report, which would appear from Annexure-‘4’ to this application and against that order, the petitioner no.1, Smt. Renu Sharma, preferred Stamp Appeal No.65 of 2008 in respect of sale deed no.1973 and both the petitioners, namely, Renu Sharma and Anita Sharma, have also preferred Stamp Appeal No.66 of 2008 in respect of sale deed no.2010, which are pending for disposal. It has also been submitted that the Commissioner, Saran Division, Chapra, on 14.10.2008 in Stamp Appeal No.65 of 2008, has also passed the order that if the FIR has not been filed already, it should not be filed till the matter is disposed of, which would appear from Annexure-‘9’ to this application, but maliciously, the First Information Report has been lodged by the opposite party no.4, Jai Kumar, Sub-Registrar, Sonepur, Saran. 4. It appears from the First Information Report of Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45000 of 2008 (10) dt.05-04-2012 4 / 4 4 Sonepur P.S. Case No.220 of 2008 that the same has been lodged on 14.10.2008 on the basis of the written report dated 14.10.2008 of the informant-opposite party no.4, Jai Kumar, Sub-Registrar, Sonepur, Saran, under [STATUTE] and Section 82 of the Indian Registration Act against the nine accused including the petitioners and all the offences are cognizable in nature regarding which the police has statutory right to investigate the case, as such, there is no justification of quashing of the First Information Report of Sonepur P.S. Case No.220 of 2008. 5. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I find no merit in this application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. P.S./- (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 423

Statute Text:
Section 423 of the Indian Penal Code. Fraudulent execution of deed of transfer containing a false statement of consideration. Whoever dishonestly or fraudulently signs, executes or becomes a party to any deed or instrument which purports to transfer or subject to any charge any property, or any interest therein, and which contains any false statement relating to the consideration for such transfer or charge, or relating to the person or persons for whose use or benefit it is really intended to operate, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.