SUNITA RANI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-2001-1-240
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on January 22,2001

Sunita Rani And Others Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Amar Dutt, J. - (1.) - Sunita Rani and Ramesh Kumar through this petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code are seeking the quashment of the FIR No. 25 dated 26.3.2000 which was registered in Police Station Sudhar, Police District Jagraon, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) According to the complaint which was registered on the application of one Jagtar Singh, the petitioners had entered into an agreement with him on 29.4.1999 for the sale of residential properties in village Rattan bearing Khewat No. 5/5, Khatauni No. 10/14, Khasra No. 27/14, 15, measuring 1 kanal 2 marlas (1573/4800th shares) for a consideration of Rs. 21 lacs and received 5 lacs in cash as earnest money in the presence of Inderjeet Singh Gill and Raminder Singh. The sale deed was to be executed on or before 23.3.2000 and at the time of execution of the agreement, the petitioners had represented that they were the owners of the property in dispute and no portion thereof had been sold to anyone and the original sale deed pertaining to this property had been handed over to the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant had asked the petitioner to receive the balance sale consideration and to execute the sale deed in his favour but they had been putting the matter off on one pretext or the other. A legal notice had also been served on them and the complainant had ultimately found that the petitioners had cheated him as they had already sold some other shops on the property in dispute to other persons prior to the agreement. Inquiries had also revealed that the petitioners had forged the copy of the jamabandi and, thus, they had committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code.
(3.) Quashing of the FIR is being sought on the ground that on 26.3.1999 the complainant had approached the SSP, Ludhiana with a request that the petitioners were not paying money due to him despite repeated requests. This application of the complainant was an abuse of the process of law which had been moved with a view to put undue pressure on the petitioners for recovery of money in pursuance of this application. The police of Police Station Sudhar had called Mohan Lal, Ramesh Kumar and Ravi Kumar sons of Dhani Ram and forced them to enter into an agreement accordingh to which the amount due from the petitioners was adjusted towards the earnest money which was payable by the complainant to them under agreement which they were forced to execute. The petitioners have asserted that both the compromise dated 17.4.1999 as well as the agreement to sell which was entered into on 29.4.1999, have been executed by them under pressure of the police and therefore, was void, ab initio and unforceable under law. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the FIR which has been lodged against them has to be quashed as the respondents can not be given the liberty to abuse the process of law in connivance with the police.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.