1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1579/2008. Sanjay s/o Shankarrao Ghatage Age: 43 Yrs., occu. Govt. Service, R/o `Shriniwas’, Behind RTO office, Railway Station Road, Aurangabad - APPLICANT VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra 2) Habibabee w/o Shaikh Bandu Age: 50 Yrs., occu. Household, R/o Bhamathan,Tq. Shrirampur, District Ahmednagar. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.SS Advocate for Applicant; Mr.DR Korde, APP for State. Mrs.SS Jadhav, Advocate for Respondent No.2 ----- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 26th August, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2) By order dated 29.1.2009, Rule is issued and matter is expedited. 3) Applicant – Sanjay is a Government employee at the material time, working as In Charge Sub-Registrar at the Sub-Registrar’s office at Vaijapur. A document, purporting to be 2 of sale was presented on 27.6.2007 which was signed by two witnesses and one executant in respect of agricultural land Gut No.94 and 132 enclosing 7/12 extract thereof. It is canvassed that in order to squeeze rights in favour of the legal representatives of the deceased, the sale- deed is executed by one of the legal representatives, obliterating right of the claimant/complainant. Prosecution was initiated on 10.7.2007, based on proceedings under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. dated 7.7.2007 in RCC No. 189/2007 before the learned JMFC, Vaijapur. Reading the complaint as a whole, the role attributed to the present applicant -Sanjay would not be in terms of infraction of Section 467, 468, 470 of IPC. The acts and actions of the present applicant are governed by Registration Manual and Rule 44 thereof indicate as to what precautions a Registrar has to ensure before accepting the document for registration. The guidelines in the instant case do not seem to have been skipped by the present applicant/Sanjay. He has no personal interest in the matter, nor it is alleged that he has activated in concert or confluence with the executant of the document. Consequently, the prosecution by RCC No. 189/2007 followed by F.I.R., vide Crime No. 9/2007, registered at Vaijapur police station, is certainly amounting 3 to abuse of process of law. The prosecution will be terming into a persecution more leaning to humiliation of the applicant herein. The applicant may, in the situation, face a departmental action. Consequently, the prosecution as against the present applicant – Sanjay cannot be further extended. Hence, order. 4) Criminal Application allowed. The prosecution initiated against the present applicant – Sanjay s/o Shankarrao Ghatage is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute in above terms. The prosecution may proceed against other persons named in the complaint/F.I.R. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bdv/cran1579.08