Judgment ( 1 ) ORDER :- Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner for final disposal of this petition at the admission stage itself. ( 2 ) THIS petition by the complainant-petitioner has been preferred being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 4-9-97 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ratangarh in Cr. Misc. Case No. 14/97 while dismissing the petitioners protest petition and accepting the Final Report No. 70 dated 30-10-96 filed by the Police Station, Sujangarh. ( 3 ) BRIEFLY stated the facts giving rise to this petition are that the complainant-petitioner as well as the accused non-petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are residents of Sujangarh Distt. Churu. the petitioner lodged a written report before the Collector, Churu alleging therein that the land bearing Khasra No. 431 measuring 23. 13 bighas falling to the share of Nathu Ram is situated in Gopalpura and half of this agricultural land falling to the share of Nathu Ram, who is Kalbeliya and as such a member of Scheduled Caste, sold land measuring 11. 13 bighas to Smt. Phooli Devi widow of Rughnath Jogi and that Smt. Phooli Devi has been described as Kalbeliya (Jogi) in the sale deed so executed and got registered on 9-1-76 before Sub-Registrar, Sujangarh by the vendor Nathu Ram, who being a Kalbeliya, is a member of Scheduled Caste and, accordingly in view of bar against sale, transfer and mortgage etc. by any member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe under Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, the sale was ab initio void. So the main grievance agitated by the complainant-petitioner was that Nathu Ram as well as Smt. Phooli Devi through accused-non-petitioner Kheta Nath made a false statement before the Sub-Registrar at the time of registration of the sale deed that since Smt. Phooli Devi being a member of Kalbeliya caste, being a member of the Scheduled Caste, the land was transferred by one member of the Scheduled caste to another member of the same caste whereas Smt. Phooli Devi being a Nath (Jogi) was never member of a Scheduled Caste and, instead. Nath (Jogi) sub-caste has been recently declared to be amongst the other Backward Classes and, resultantly, the aforesaid persons entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the State Government thereby to cause wrongful loss to the Government by way of falsification of a document wherein false description of the vendee has been so given by effecting transfer of the said land contrary to the provisions of Section 42 of the Raj. Tenancy Act and, accordingly, the accused-non-petitioners and others are liable for commission of offences punishable under Ss. 420, 467 and 468, I. P. C. ( 4 ) THE Collector, Churu through the S. P. , Churu forwarded this report to the Officer-in-charge, Police Station, Sujangarh whereat an F. I. R. was registered and investigation was taken up. As a result of investigation, it was reported that it was a pure and simple case of civil nature and no offences were found to have been committed by either of the accused-non-petitioners or any other person and hence an F. R. (negative) was submitted before the trial Court. The complainant-petitioner being informed of it, moved protest petition before the trial Court and the learned Presiding Officer of the trial Court, while considering the Protest Petition and so also F. R. submitted by the police, vide his impugned order, held that there were no grounds to believe commission of offences under Sections 420, 467 and 468 read with Section 471, I. P. C. and, consequently, the accused-non-petitioners could not be proceeded against and hence the Protest Petition was dismissed and the F. R. (negative) submitted by the police was accepted resulting in present petition invoking inherent powers of this Court, as above. ( 5 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating all the contentions as have been raised in the petition itself, submitted that, as also resulting from the investigation besides the sale deed executed by the vendor Nathu Ram, mutation form wherein the land transferred by Nathu Ram, as above, stands recorded in the "khatedari" of Smt. Phooli Devi wherein her caste has been described as Kalbeliya-Jogi. Besides, Jamabandi as well as the affidavits of Nathu Ram and Madan Nath along with caste certificate issued by the Tehsildar, Sujangarh as well as the Ration Card of the members of the family of the accused-non-petitioner Smt. Phooli Devi, there is no doubt left that the vendee of the land who entered into a transaction of the sale of the agricultural land and that Nathu Ram is member of Nath (Jogi) caste and not Kalbeliya (Jogi) whereas in the sale deed executed by Nathu Ram her caste has been mentioned as Kalbeliya (Jogi) and, consequently the parties to the said transaction of sale and transfer of the agricultural land connived with an intent to deceive the State Government as a result of which Nathu Ram succeeded in effecting transfer of the land by way of sale under a registered sale deed through the agency of the Sub-Registrar, Sujangarh and the accused-non-petitioner Smt. Phooli Devi through the agency of her husbands brother Kheta Nath has benefited out of this fraudulent transaction and, consequently, the sale deed so executed by Sub-Registrar is a false and forged document made for the purpose of cheating and,consequently, there were reasons to believe that offences under Sections 420, 467 and 468 read with Section 471, I. P. C. were made out as resulting from material and documents filed along with the F. R. (negative) by the police. So, the learned trial Magistrate did not appreciate the material on record specially the documents referred to above and filed along with the petition itself and, while citing decision rendered in Smt. Nagawwa v. Veeranna Shivalingappa, AIR 1976 SC 1947 : (1976 Cri LJ 1533) has further submitted that at the stage of issuing process the Magistrate is mainly concerned with the allegations made in the complaint or the evidence led in support of the same and he is only to be prima facie satisfied whether there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused. It is not the province of the Magistrate to enter into a detailed discussion of the merits or de-merits of the case nor can the High Court go into this matter in its revisional jurisdiction which is a very limited one. It is not the province of the Magistrate to enter into a detailed discussion of the merits or de-merits of the case nor can the High Court go into this matter in its revisional jurisdiction which is a very limited one. Consequently, when there were grounds enough before the trial Court to proceed against the accused for their commission of the aforesaid offences, the learned trial Magistrate conveniently overlooked all these facts and circumstances and, consequently, the impugned order so passed by the learned trial Magistrate suffers from serious illegality and infirmity in exercise of its jurisdiction and, therefore, in case the impugned order is allowed to sustain, the same shall occasion a failure of justice and, therefore, it is in the interest of justice that the impugned order be set aside and the learned Magistrate be asked to proceed further against the accused-non-petitioners for the aforesaid offences. ( 6 ) NEEDLESS to repeat that the complainant-petitioner is wholly stranger to the transaction that was entered into between Nathu Ram and Smt. Phooli Devi. Besides, so far as the alleged sale deed is concerned, he is neither a party to the sale transaction nor was he any witness. He could not have had any direct knowledge about the transaction that was entered into between the parties to the sale. Besides, the complainant lodged a complaint before the Collector and so far as the commission of any offence is concerned, the same report stood transferred to the Police Station, Sujangarh whereat the case was registered and, on completion of its investigation, an F. R. (negative) was filed before the trial Court. The trial Court was of the opinion that there were no grounds to proceed against the accused-non-petitioners for commission of any of the said offences and, therefore, did not think it proper to take cognizance of any offence on the basis of police report (negative) by the police in exercise of powers under Section 190 (1) (b), Cr. P. C. Accordingly, the question of taking cognizance occurred as soon as the learned Magistrate as such applied his mind to the suspected commission of the offences and, on consideration of the same, held that there were no grounds to believe that any offence as alleged by the complainant-petitioner was committed and, consequently, the final order was passed. P. C. Accordingly, the question of taking cognizance occurred as soon as the learned Magistrate as such applied his mind to the suspected commission of the offences and, on consideration of the same, held that there were no grounds to believe that any offence as alleged by the complainant-petitioner was committed and, consequently, the final order was passed. Besides, there is no statement from the side of the Sub-Registrar himself or any of the witnesses except Nathu Ram who is executant of the sale deed that the sale deed was registered by the Sub-Registrar on the basis of representation made before it that the purchaser of the land was also a member of the Scheduled Caste being Kalbeliya. Smt. Phooli Devi is not shown to be present either at the time of scribing and execution of the sale deed as well as its registration which is certified to have been presented before the Sub-Registrar by none but its executant Nathu Ram. In case any entry finds place regarding the caste of Smt. Phooli Devi, being described as Kalbeliya (Jogi), it must have been at the instance and behest of none except Nathu Ram himself. He alone appeared before the Sub-Registrar and since, in his own sworn affidavit as well, as late as on 8-10-96, he has attempted to wriggle out and withdraw this admission of his own that Kheta Nath Jogi (Nath) whose field is situated just in his neighbourhood and, accordingly, Nathu Ram could not have been ignorant about the caste of Smt. Phooli Devi which is described by him in the sale deed as Kalbeliya (Jogi) instead of Nath (Jogi) as he now claims in his affidavit. ( 7 ) IT was the sale deed which became basis for transfer of the agricultural land measuing 11. 13 bighas in favour of Smt. Phooli Devi and there is not a single iota of evidence to show that Smt. Phooli Devi ever reported before any authority or witness that she was by-caste Kalbeliya and not Nath (Jogi) by-caste and, that, any how, relying on this statement of hers, Nathu Ram was ever induced to enter into the transaction of sale of the land. Therefore, in absence of total evidence regarding any statement, act or conduct attributed to the accused-non-petitioner Smt. Phooli Devi by no stretch of imagination it could be held that she had either made a false, fraudulent or deceitful statement of fact representing herself to be Kalbeliya (Jogi) by caste and it dishonestly induced Nathu Ram to have entered into the transaction of sale of land in favour of Smt. Phooli Devi. Similarly, the sale deed does not show that Kheta Nath was also party to the transaction that he had, any how, fraudulently or dishonestly induced Nathu Ram to enter into the transaction of sale. On the contrary, none of the accused-non-petitioners is proved to have appeared before the Sub-Registrar to have made any fraudulent or dishonest inducement either to Nathu Ram or to the Sub-Registrar for execution and registration of the saledeed thereby inducing Nahu Ram to deliver the property to Smt. Phooli Devi. Consequently, in case there was initially, any fraudulent intention at the time of transaction of sale of the land, Nathu Ram, as also stated by him, was in dire need of money and, accordingly, he took money as a consideration for sale of the said agricultural land of his khatedari rights to Smt. Phooli Devi accused-non-petitioner and, subsequently, he appeared before the Sub-Registrar representing that he was transferring his khatedari rights as well as title and interest in the land in favour of Smt. Phooli Devi describing her as a member of Kalbeliya (Jogi) so as to over-come the prohibition under Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. However, Nathu Ram has not been proceeded against by the complainant-petitioner in this complaint and, instead, with the aid of Nathu Ram obtaining his affidavit after more than 20 years of the transaction, the petitioner has sought prosecution of the accused-non-petititioners who are having strained relations which the complainant-petitioner since certain litigations are going on between them and, it does not appear inappropriate on the part of the Investigating Officer to conclude that with an intent to wreck vengeance on the accused-non-petitioner, the complainant-petitioner foisted this case on them. ( 8 ) RESULTANTLY, neither the State Government through the Tehsildar (Revenue) nor Nathu Ram came out with any grievance before any lawful authority that he stood cheated by way of being induced either dishonestly or fraudulently to enter into this transaction with Smt. Phooli Devi and, consequently, since there does not arise any question of cheating of the complainant-petitioner himself and merely because, unless prohibited or barred by any specific provision of law, any person can set the law in motion, in the aforesaid circumstances, specially when the alleged sale transaction took place before 9-1-76 and a period of 21 years has elapsed since then, the complainant-petitioner, in the aforesaid circumstances, cannot be permitted to invoke inherent powers of this Court thereby taking cognizance of any such offences against the accused-non-petitioners. Consequently, the impugned order does not result in any manifest injustice or occasioning a failure of justice to the complainant-petitioner who appears to have been motivated maliciously to proceed against the accused-non-petitioners and, therefore, in case this petition is accepted and cognizance of any offence against them is taken, it shall necessarily infringe on the fundamental rights of the accused-non-petitioners to life and liberty guaranteed under Art. 21 of the Constitution of India. ( 9 ) CONSEQUENTLY, when the vendor Nathu Ram could not have been ignorant and unaware of the caste of Smt. Phooli Devi and, instead, he alone described her as a member of Kalbeliya (Jogi), as above, and there is no record showing that Smt. Phooli Devi herself or with her connivance and knowledge Kheta Nath also made any such false representation in regard to caste of vendee Smt. Phooli Devi either before Nathu Ram or before the Sub-Registrar at any time on or before 9-1-76 and, resultantly, neither Kheta Nath nor Smt. Phooli Devi could be held liable for commission of offences of cheating as described under Section 415 and so also for making any false document thereby committing any offence under Section 467 or 468 simpliciter or with the aid of S. 471, I. P. C. and, consequently, when there were no sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused thereby warranting taking cognizance of any of such offences by the trial Court, the learned trial Magistrate did not commit any illegality or any irregularity warranting interference with the impugned order and, consequently, since inherent powers are meant to be exercised sparingly and with circumspection when there is reason to believe that the process of law is being misused to harass a person or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, in the case in hand, as well, the present petition deserves to be dismissed. ( 10 ) AS a result of above discussion, since this petition is wholly devoid of any merit and, consequently, the same stands dismissed and the impugned order passed by the learned trial Magistrate is affirmed. Petition dismissed. .